You can't rail this much about "media narrative" when you don't understand that the motivation to fund Ukraine is geopolitical first and moral second.
The fact is that the money the US spends in Ukraine is smaller than the cost of responding to Russia encroaching on NATO territory and forcing a direct military involvement from us. That money is the US paying to maintain its diplomatic credibility towards its most important allies. Not supporting Ukraine would incur long term costs in terms of influence, trust, and access the US can't afford to bear.
It's not that complicated.
And no, it's not $100 billion, and it's certainly not cash money; it's mostly **** that would have sat here and rotted in military warehouses.
The historic sums are helping a broad set of Ukrainian people and institutions, including refugees, law enforcement, and independent radio broadcasters, though most of the aid has been military-related.
www.pbs.org