- Politico faced a payroll delay this week, citing a "technical error," coinciding with Trump's USAID funding freeze.
- The outlet appears to have received $27 million in government funding under Biden, raising ethical concerns about taxpayer-subsidized media.
- Politico's Politico Pro subscriptions, costing $10,000 annually, are largely government-funded, sparking accusations of stealth subsidies.
- The outlet's credibility was also questioned over its dismissal of the Hunter Biden laptop story, later confirmed as authentic.
- Politico's left-leaning coverage and reliance on government funding undermine journalistic independence and transparency.
Politico, the Washington-based news outlet known for its left-leaning coverage, found itself unable to pay its staffers this week due to what it called a “technical error.” The timing of the payroll mishap has raised eyebrows, coinciding with the Trump administration’s freeze on USAID funding.
While there’s no direct evidence linking the two events, the incident has prompted scrutiny into Politico’s financial ties to the federal government—and the serious ethical implications of taxpayer dollars flowing to media outlets.
According to federal spending records reviewed by USASPENDING.gov, Politico received up to $27 million in government funding during the Biden administration. The payments, largely for subscription services like Politico Pro, which costs around $10,000 annually, have sparked accusations that the outlet is effectively subsidized by taxpayer dollars. Such funding clearly undermines journalistic independence, particularly given Politico's role in promoting narratives favorable to the Biden administration.
A coincidence or a connection?
The payroll issue at Politico emerged just as former President Donald Trump’s administration moved to freeze USAID funding, a decision that has drawn both praise and criticism. While Politico insists the payment delay was due to a technical glitch, some observers have questioned whether the outlet’s reliance on government contracts left it vulnerable to financial disruptions.
“POLITICO has a subscription called PoliticoPro, which costs around $10,000 a year,” noted Chris Tomlinson of The National Pulse on X. “Given the ludicrous cost, I’m guessing upwards of 90% of these subscriptions are government-funded. It seems to me the entire program is a stealthy way of acquiring massive government subsidies.”
Politico isn’t alone in benefiting from taxpayer dollars. The New York Times received $2.7 million in government funds during the same period. These revelations have fueled concerns about the Biden administration’s use of taxpayer money to prop up media organizations that align with its agenda.
Politico’s credibility has come under fire for its handling of the Hunter Biden laptop story during the 2020 election. The outlet was among those that dismissed the laptop’s contents as Russian disinformation, citing a letter from 51 former intelligence officials. That narrative, which has since been debunked by the FBI, may have influenced the election’s outcome.
The laptop’s authenticity, confirmed by federal investigators, revealed damning details about Hunter Biden’s business dealings and raised questions about his father’s involvement.
A pattern of bias
Politico’s coverage has consistently leaned left, with the outlet frequently targeting conservative figures like Trump and Elon Musk. Its recent criticism of the USAID funding freeze has only added to suspicions that the outlet is more interested in advancing a political agenda than reporting the truth.
The Biden administration’s financial support for Politico and other liberal outlets raises serious ethical questions. Taxpayer dollars should not be used to fund media organizations that engage in partisan reporting or suppress stories that could damage the administration’s reputation.
The Hunter Biden laptop scandal is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to examples of the dangers of media bias and government influence. Americans must demand transparency and accountability, and it’s clear that the relationship between the press and the government must be reevaluated. In the meantime, the freeze on USAID funding serves as a powerful reminder that taxpayer dollars should not be used to prop up partisan journalism.
Sources for this article include:
Please contact us for more information.