



sorry, I just couldn’t help myself.




King Putz says Tiny Tim Cratchit can do with just 1 pencil for Christmas, the Trump economy is great, if your TRUMP. Just How Stupid Are You?
Verifiable Estimates of Donald Trump’s Net Worth Increase Since Taking Office in 2025Yes, there are verifiable estimates from reputable sources like Forbes and Bloomberg tracking the change in Donald Trump’s net worth since he took office on January 20, 2025. These are based on public financial disclosures, stock valuations (e.g., Trump Media & Technology Group, or TMTG), real estate appraisals, and cryptocurrency holdings. However, exact figures are estimates due to the private nature of much of his wealth, market volatility (especially in crypto and TMTG shares), and varying methodologies between trackers. Trump’s net worth has reportedly surged, driven largely by cryptocurrency ventures (e.g., $TRUMP memecoin and World Liberty Financial), licensing deals, and TMTG stock performance.Key Estimates and TimelineHere’s a summary of the most cited figures from major sources, focusing on pre-inauguration (late 2024/early 2025) vs. current (as of late 2025). The increase is generally pegged at $2.5–3 billion year-to-date, with Forbes providing the most detailed breakdown.
|
Source
|
Net Worth (Jan 2025, at Inauguration)
|
Net Worth (Current, Dec 2025)
|
Estimated Increase
|
Primary Drivers of Growth
|
Date of Estimate
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Forbes
|
$4.3–5.1 billion (end-2024 baseline, rising to ~$6.7B by Jan 21)
|
$7.3 billion
|
+$3 billion (from 2024 baseline); +$0.6–2.6 billion (from Jan)
|
Crypto ($1B+ from World Liberty tokens), licensing (+$400M), golf clubs (+$325M), TMTG shares
|
Sep 2025 |
|
Bloomberg Billionaires Index
|
~$7.16 billion (Jan 21)
|
$7.4–7.75 billion
|
+$0.24–0.59 billion (stable but with crypto gains)
|
TMTG stake, crypto exposure (~$620M in holdings), real estate licensing
|
Jul–Sep 2025 |
Earlier in 2025 (March/April), Forbes valued him at $5.1 billion, showing intra-year growth of ~$2.2 billion by September.
They highlight over $10 billion in Trump-branded real estate projects since early 2025 as a longer-term booster.
Wikipedia’s aggregation (as of Dec 2025) cites a post-inauguration rise from ~$6 billion to $7+ billion, factoring in a June 2025 disclosure of $1.6 billion in assets and $600 million income.
Key Factors Behind the Increase
Caveats and Verifiability
Supporters view it as savvy branding.
In summary, the most substantiated tally is Forbes’ $3 billion increase from 2024 to mid-2025, with ~$1–2 billion post-inauguration—verifiable via their methodologies and public data. This makes his second term the most financially lucrative for any U.S. president on record.

|
Category
|
Specific Allegations
|
Reported Details
|
Sources
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Government Jet Usage
|
Misuse of FBI’s $60 million Gulfstream (GV) jet for personal travel, including golf trips and visits to girlfriend.
|
– Golf Trip: In summer 2025, Patel used the jet for a recreational golf outing with friends to a private resort at the Carnegie Club in Scotland. FBI agents coordinated his transportation and security with Scottish/British authorities. – Visits to Girlfriend: Multiple flights to see Wilkins perform or simply visit her in Nashville, TN (where she lives). Examples: – October 2025: Flew to State College, PA, for her national anthem performance at a Penn State wrestling event (Real American Freestyle). The jet then continued to Nashville. This occurred during the government shutdown. – May 2025: Wilkins flew to London to join Patel at a security conference; FBI personnel transported her from the airport. – Total: At least 12 personal trips since February 2025 (vs. former Director Robert Mueller’s 10 over four years). – Cost: Directors must reimburse at commercial ticket rates (far below actual jet costs, e.g., $10,000+ per hour to operate).
|
, , , , , , , , , , [post:44], [post:46], [post:48], [post:50], [post:52], [post:54], [post:56]
|
|
Security for Girlfriend
|
Deployment of SWAT-qualified agents to protect Wilkins, who is not a spouse or official protectee.
|
– NRA Convention (Spring 2025, Atlanta): Wilkins arrived with a two-agent SWAT team from the local FBI field office (on Patel’s orders) for her national anthem performance. Patel later berated the team commander for briefly leaving her unattended, citing poor communication and perceived risks. – Other Events: Agents from Nashville’s SWAT team guarded her home; additional tactical agents from Salt Lake City protected her at a September 2025 event. Coverage extended to Las Vegas and other locations. – Rationale: FBI cites “hundreds of credible death threats” against Wilkins due to her relationship with Patel and her conservative activism (e.g., gun rights advocacy). – Criticism: SWAT teams are typically for high-risk operations, not VIP protection; agents were pulled from counterterrorism duties.
|
, , , , , , , , , [post:45], [post:47], [post:49], [post:51], [post:57]
|
Big Discrepancy Between Claimed and Real Savings
Politico found that whereas DOGE claims ~$54.2 billion in “contract cancellation” savings, only $1.4 billion could be verified via clawbacks or de-obligations. Politico
NPR’s analysis matched DOGE’s contract list to public spending databases and estimated only $2.3 billion in actual or likely real savings from the canceled contracts. NPR
DOGE has repeatedly revised its “wall of receipts” downward: it quietly deleted billions in claimed savings after media scrutiny. NPR+2NPR+2
Many Contracts Yield No Real Savings
Nearly 40% of the contracts canceled by DOGE appear to produce zero savings, according to DOGE’s own posted “receipts.” CNBC+2https://www.wdtv.com+2
Why no savings? Because in many cases, those contracts had already been fully obligated — meaning the government had already committed the money (or even spent it). https://www.wdtv.com+1
As Charles Tiefer, a former government-contracting law professor, put it:
“It’s like confiscating used ammunition … there’s nothing left in it.” https://www.wdtv.com
Accounting Tricks — Using “Ceiling Values”
A big part of the exaggeration comes from counting the maximum possible value (“ceiling”) of contracts instead of what was realistically going to be spent. PolitiFact+2NPR+2
Some of the contracts DOGE lists are “blanket purchase agreements” (BPAs). These aren’t firm orders — more like catalogs: the government can order from them if it needs to. Canceling a BPA doesn’t always save money because not all the “ceiling” was going to be spent. CNBC
Experts say that using ceiling values inflates the numbers and misleads the public about how much real money is being saved. NPR+1
Major Reporting Errors and Corrections
One glaring error: DOGE originally listed an $8 billion ICE contract as canceled, but that contract was actually only $8 million. NPR
Another: a $655 million USAID contract was apparently listed 3 times, triple counting the same item. NPR
After scrutiny, DOGE removed or revised more than 1,000 entries from its “wall of receipts” — reducing its previously claimed large savings. Reuters
Lease & Workforce Claims Also Questioned
DOGE claims additional savings from canceled leases and workforce reductions, but some experts argue that even these numbers are overstated or lack clarity. NPR
For lease savings, cost-benefit questions emerge: terminating leases may have “savings,” but what are the long-term costs (or the lost value)? Wikipedia
On workforce: DOGE reportedly has pushed out or gotten buyouts from tens of thousands of federal workers, but the long-term impact on efficiency and government capacity is unclear. Le Monde.fr
Lack of Verifiable “Cash Back” to Treasury
Even if DOGE “saves” money (in its accounting), that doesn’t necessarily mean the money is returned to the Treasury. Some “savings” are theoretical — based on de-obligation, not actual cash recovered. Politico
Experts note: just because a contract is canceled doesn’t guarantee that all unspent money is clawed back. Politico+1
Transparency Questions
While DOGE claims to provide transparency (through its receipts page), many entries lack sufficient identifying information to verify in third-party databases. Politico
The methods for calculating some “savings” are opaque; for example, assumptions used in workforce or regulatory cuts are not always publicly disclosed. NPR
There are legal questions: DOGE isn’t a standard government agency — it operates more like a temporary advisory/cut-team. Some experts worry about the legality, authority, and oversight. CNBC
Taxpayer Risk of Illusion: If DOGE’s numbers are largely based on inflated ceilings and double-counts, then the “savings” might be more PR than real return to taxpayers.
False Justification for Cuts: Using exaggerated figures to justify cutting contracts or laying off workers can undermine agencies’ capacity, potentially weakening government services in critical areas.
Accountability Gap: Without full transparency, the public and Congress may have a hard time tracking whether DOGE’s “savings” are actually materializing.
Cost of Errors: If DOGE cancels contracts or leases based on wrong assumptions, there may be downstream costs (e.g., legal battles, replacing canceled work, rehiring, re-contracting) that erase some of the “savings.”
YOUR MONEY — Mar-A-Lago weekend trips Jan to Nov $17.4 million ?? We Can’t afford a Turkey, Pun Intended. Or should that be a Lame Duck.
| Cost Basis | Per-Trip Cost | 22-Trip Total (Jan–Nov) |
|---|---|---|
| Low ($142,380/hr) | $640,710 | $14.1 million |
| Mid ($176,393/hr) | $793,768 | $17.4 million |
| High (~$200,000/hr) | $900,000 | $19.8 million |
Amount: ~$220 million contracted by DHS. ProPublica+2DCReport.org+2
Recipient: Safe America Media, LLC — a Delaware-registered company created just days before receiving the contract. ProPublica
Purpose: Border-security-themed ad campaign, featuring Secretary Noem warning of enforcement (“Break our laws, we’ll punish you”). Yahoo+1
Procurement Process: DHS invoked a “national emergency” at the southern border to bypass the usual competitive bidding process. Yahoo+1
Transparency Concerns: It’s unclear who the subcontractors are — “how, where and to whom … Safe America Media doled out the $143 million” is not publicly disclosed. ProPublica+1
Ties to Noem:
Strategy Group (a political firm closely connected to Noem) appears to have done production work. ProPublica
The Strategy Group’s CEO, Ben Yoho, is married to Noem’s DHS spokesperson, Tricia McLaughlin. DCReport.org+1
The Strategy Group previously worked on Noem’s 2022 South Dakota gubernatorial campaign. ProPublica+1
Ethics Red Flags: Contracting experts say the structure suggests potential conflicts of interest and favoritism. DCReport.org+1
Watchdogs’ Reaction: Former contracting official called the deal “corrupt.” Yahoo
Amount Spent (so far): $76.6 million of taxpayer money on Noem-led ads. Accountable US
Companies Involved:
Safe America Media, LLC — same Delaware-based LLC mentioned above. Accountable US
People Who Think, LLC — another company receiving funds. Accountable US
Connections: One of the companies is linked to Noem’s longtime aide Corey Lewandowski, according to Accountable.US. Accountable US
Contextual Note: This spending is occurring while other areas of federal funding (like SNAP, Medicaid) are being cut, according to the watchdog group. Accountable US
Amount: $80,000
Source: Paid by the American Resolve Policy Fund — a nonprofit that operates in the “dark money” space (does not fully disclose its donors). ProPublica
Purpose: The payment was compensation for Noem’s fundraising efforts. ProPublica
Ethics Issue: Noem did not list this payment on her public ethics disclosures. ProPublica+1
Corporate Structure: The nonprofit routed the money into a Delaware LLC owned by Noem. ProPublica
Safe America Media, LLC (Delaware)
DHS awarded roughly $143 million of its $220 million ad campaign to a Delaware-based LLC called Safe America Media. South Dakota Searchlight+3ProPublica+3Latin Times+3
That company was created just days before the contract was awarded. ProPublica+2Boing Boing+2
Its listed address is the Virginia home of a Republican operative named Michael McElwain. ProPublica
Very little is publicly known about how Safe America Media pays subcontractors or how it’s structured (“how, where and to whom … doled out the $143 million is unknown”). ProPublica+2Dakota Free Press+2
Strategy Group
Even though Safe America Media is the named recipient on the DHS contracts, the actual production of at least some of the ads (e.g. the Mount Rushmore ad with Noem on horseback) appears to have been done by the Strategy Group, a consulting firm with very close ties to Noem. ProPublica+2TPM – Talking Points Memo+2
The Strategy Group’s CEO, Benjamin Yoho, is married to Noem’s chief DHS spokesperson, Tricia McLaughlin. ProPublica
This same firm worked on Noem’s 2022 gubernatorial campaign in South Dakota. ProPublica
Other Ties
Corey Lewandowski, a longtime Noem adviser, is also deeply connected to this network of firms. South Dakota Searchlight+1
A watchdog report (Accountable.US) found that DHS paid $76.6 million so far to two LLCs with these connections (Safe America Media, and People Who Think, LLC). Accountable US

Conflict of Interest / Ethics: Because the Strategy Group (which did the actual creative work) is so closely tied to Noem’s inner circle, critics argue there’s a conflict. ProPublica+2Latin Times+2
Lack of Transparency: The structure (a “mysterious” shell-company LLC created just before the contract) makes it hard to trace exactly who did what, and how the money was spent. ProPublica
Bypassing Competition: According to ProPublica, DHS invoked a “national emergency” at the border to skip the usual competitive bidding — meaning these contracts didn’t go through a fully open procurement process. DCReport.org+2Latin Times+2
Previous State-Level Work: The same firms (like Strategy Group) have received money from Noem’s South Dakota government (e.g., $8.5 million for state-level ads) when she was governor. Rapid City NewsCenter1+1
Bernie, Bernie, Bernie
I received a “look at what I am doing” email from Bernie Sanders and because I hate comments or sound bites taken out of context I decided to share the complete email — without the “oh, send money” part. You’re welcome.
The gist of his proposed legislation is having America take a stake in the developing AI revolution. And I have to admit the general idea could help fill the enormous hole in our coffers created by the current administration and their efforts to bankrupt this nation.
His first point I am all for. Sounds great.
“This legislation would guarantee that the trillions of dollars potentially generated by A.I. are used to improve the lives of all of us — not simply to make the richest people in the world even richer.”
It’s this part I have an issue with. Big Brother having a 50% voting and control share.
“The federal government would have the power, through its voting shares and an equal representation on each company’s board, to block decisions that hurt our citizens and to push for policies that help them.”
Let’s be honest. The American people still would not have a voice in how AI is developed. A few politicians would have that say. They would tell us it’s our voice — but all you have to do is look at the gilding of bronze statues to understand what our voice is actually worth these days.
Sorry. That just slipped out.
Bernie’s diagnosis is correct. AI is being built on the collective knowledge of humanity — every book, article, conversation, and creative work ever digitized. The people who happen to own the compute infrastructure shouldn’t be the sole beneficiaries of that collective inheritance.
But his prescription has a fatal flaw.
We have already seen the debate around AI and government power play out in real time. Anthropic — one of the companies named in Bernie’s legislation — has publicly stated that it does not want its technology used for fully autonomous lethal weapons or the mass surveillance of Americans. That is exactly the kind of ethical guardrail that responsible AI development requires.
Do we really want whichever party happens to be in power having direct influence over whether those guardrails stay in place? Do we want political considerations overriding ethical ones when the technology has the potential to do tremendous good and tremendous harm simultaneously?
This isn’t about losing jobs. It’s about losing what’s left of our freedom. Our personal freedom. Do we really want anyone looking over our shoulder — reading everything we write? This article. A private letter. A conversation between a grandparent and a grandchild.
So Bernie — 50% sounds good financially. But maybe it should be non-voting stock.
I don’t trust billionaires enough to hand them AI.
I don’t trust politicians enough to hand them AI either.
We need guidelines. We need oversight. But that has to be done with the help of government — not by government.
If the public is going to own a stake in AI that ownership should be managed by an independent public trust. Not elected politicians. Not the companies themselves. An independent entity charged with protecting the public’s investment while remaining insulated from political pressure and corporate influence.
A Public Investment Authority. Something like the Alaska Permanent Fund — created to ensure that the wealth generated from a public resource actually benefited the public rather than whoever happened to be in power when the resource was discovered.
The question isn’t whether public investment in AI should exist.
The question is how to structure it so that neither politicians nor corporations can abuse it.
Bernie is asking the right question.
He just needs a better answer.
Bernies email.
“Since A.I. is built on the collective knowledge of humanity, the wealth it generates must benefit humanity. Not just Mr. Musk, Mr. Altman, Dario Amodei and other moguls whose companies are positioned to dominate the industry. Not just venture capitalists in Silicon Valley or money managers on Wall Street who undoubtedly see A.I. as the next great wealth-extracting machine.
That is why I will soon be introducing the American A.I. Sovereign Wealth Fund Act. This legislation would give the public a direct ownership stake in the largest A.I. companies in our country. How? It would create a sovereign wealth fund through a one-time 50 percent tax — not on the profits of OpenAI, Anthropic, xAI and other companies, but paid with something far more valuable than that: the stock.
If passed, this legislation would do two crucial things. First, it would give the public a direct role in determining the future of this technology. No longer would the future of A.I. and the transformation of human life that it will bring be dictated by a handful of Big Tech oligarchs. The federal government would have the power, through its voting shares and an equal representation on each company’s board, to block decisions that hurt our citizens and to push for policies that help them.
Second, this legislation would guarantee that the trillions of dollars potentially generated by A.I. are used to improve the lives of all of us — not simply to make the richest people in the world even richer. If the big A.I. companies continue to grow as rapidly as many analysts expect, then the value of the sovereign wealth fund will grow as well — and the benefits to the American people will grow along with it.”
Share this:
Like this: