reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Do you liberals even realize you're championing the right of unelected bureaucrats to spend billions of our tax dollars in other countries? You're making videos, writing articles, protesting, and filing lawsuits to ensure this happens. Imagine if I told you ten years ago that in 2025, liberals would be fighting for billions, maybe trillions, to be spent in other countries on things that don't benefit America while we sink deeper into debt. You're fighting for politicians to line their pockets with payments to useless programs and countries. And what are you fighting against? People who want to audit the government, see where our money is going, identify waste, and expose fraud. Are you out of your minds?

"This is political theater. I'm gonna call out both sides right here. It's all posturing. It's fake fighting." "We all know where it ends up. This is Groundhog Day." "We always get a c r in September, and then we get an omnibus." "We might get the omnibus before Christmas, but if we're not good, it comes after Christmas." "We should have done 12 separate bills." "But, again, whether Democrats are in control or Republicans are in control, we never do the 12 separate bills." "It's because Democrats wanna grow the welfare state, and republicans wanna grow the military industrial complex." "I guarantee it."

For the last couple of weeks, Democrats have been attacking those who are exposing wasteful spending instead of focusing on stopping the spending. This underscores the fundamental difference between the left and conservatives. The left thinks bureaucrats are smarter than the American people. I'd rather trust the 77 million people who elected President Trump to identify the dumb things that taxpayer money is going towards. They're attacking the people President Trump put in charge. You can't question the bureaucrats, even though the smartest bureaucrat, Dr. Fauci, was wrong about many things. They even tried to set up a disinformation governance board to tell us what we can and can't say. I'll trust the guy elected by 77 million Americans to focus on stopping the stupid spending. We have a $36 trillion debt. We should pass Mr. Siskamani's bill again this year.

Trump says the administration removed wasteful items from the budget, which upset Congresswoman Ocasio Cortez and the socialist wing of the Democratic Party. They took out items that existed under President Biden and are demanding they be put back in. Examples cited include: $3,000,000 for circumcision and vasectomies in Zambia; $500,000 of American taxpayer money for electric buses in Rwanda; $3,600,000 for pastry cooking classes and dance focus groups for male prostitutes in Haiti. I kid you not. $6,000,000 for media organizations for the Palestinians; $833,000 for transgender people in Nepal; $300,000 for a pride parade in Lesotho; $882,000 for social media and mentorship in Serbia; $4,200,000; $4,200,000 for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex people in the Western Balkans and Uganda. The congresswoman and the socialist wing threaten to shut down the government till we get this back in. The fight is about putting this back in the bill.

- Kibbe on Liberty hosts Congressman Thomas Massey for part one of a mega episode focusing on the FBI-identified pipe bomber in the January 6 events and the anomalies in the official narrative; Massey argues he does not believe one loner acted alone. - Massey discusses prior coverage and context, noting a Steve Baker interview that documented inconsistencies in the official narrative. He points to fallout from that interview: a Capitol Hill Police official, who was third in command, resigned the day after the interview; another whistleblower contacted Massey about that officer, suggesting misconduct unrelated to the pipe bomb but part of a larger pattern of investigations. - Massey argues that the FBI’s announcement of a suspect came about a week after that interview and after reporting by The Blaze, and suggests the timing is suspicious. He says this coincidence is surprising and potentially a red flag, given that the investigation had been deemed inconclusive or dormant for years. - Massey emphasizes his own context: his staffer on the Hill watched hours of video to identify who found the second pipe bomb; he asserts that the individuals who found the second bomb should be considered suspects, and that the FBI admitted this to him. He recounts efforts with Kevin McCarthy to release video showing how the second pipe bomb was found, noting that those who found it were very lucky to locate it quickly. - He describes other connections and leads: his staffer now works for Kash Patel; Massey has spoken with a counter-surveillance officer who found the pipe bomb and with the officer’s handler, a Capitol Hill Police member who had previously worked for the ATF and later for Metro Police and Capitol Hill Police. He also mentions conversing with the assistant FBI director in charge of the Washington field office, in a transcribed interview with Jim Jordan about why cell phone data wasn’t used to geolocate the suspect (the provider allegedly corrupted data, which the judiciary committee and Barry Loudermilk’s committee disputed). - Massey references a 100-page report from Barry Loudermilk’s committee on the pipe bomb investigation, noting leads the FBI did not follow. He mentions a lead about an individual in Falls Church, Virginia (a former military man now in government service) whose metro card was used on January 5 and January 6; this person’s childhood friend allegedly used the metro card to approach the RNC/Capitol Hill Club area and take photographs near the pipe bomb sites. Massey asserts this person of interest, plus a neighbor who shared a wall with him, could be connected to others the FBI has not fully explored. - He contends that the arrest appears to derail other investigations and interviews that were being planned. He asserts that a “pro-Trump” motive has not been established for the suspect, contrasting the media’s framing with details such as the suspect’s My Little Pony interest and parental political donations. - Massey criticizes the prosecutor in the case, Jocelyn Ballantine, and recounts concerns about her track record (including involvement in the Flynn case, the Proud Boys case, and alleged attempts to obtain confessions implicating Trump). He questions why she remains at the DOJ. - They discuss broader concerns about FBI politicization and surveillance: Massey references reporters and contact with Kash Patel’s team to argue for cleaning house at the FBI, but notes Ballantine remains in place. He describes eight senators discovering they had been spied on, leading to a legislative push: in the last continuing resolution, lawmakers added a half-million-dollar payout and standing to sue the government for surveillance abuses, a provision he characterizes as carving exemptions out of the law; he says this was supported by most lawmakers, who voted for the CR due to Trump concerns. - They debate possible explanations for the pipe bomber case: the possibility that the FBI identified the suspect and cleared him, prompting no arrest due to exonerating information; or the possibility of a false narrative crafted by others to preserve the January 6 prosecution framework; or the involvement of a patsy or rogue actor. - Massey reiterates his three things he said on Twitter: the bomber was a lone wolf (which he disputes); the FBI was unwittingly incompetent for four years (which he says he questions and calls a cover-up); and it was not a Trump supporter. He stresses the need for more transcribed interviews and explanations from the FBI and ongoing oversight to uncover the full truth. - The discussion shifts toward Epstein files coverage and the broader goal of maintaining public pressure for transparency. They indicate a plan to release a separate bonus episode focusing on Epstein files.

The America First agenda is going up in smoke as Congress prepares to vote for a continuing resolution, funding the government through September. This resolution continues funding USAID and Israel, with no money for border security. It's business as usual, with endless continuing resolutions that never improve things for Americans. While most Republicans fall in line, Congressman Thomas Massey is refusing to vote for this "scam," opposing sending money overseas to those who hate us. Trump is now trying to find a primary opponent to challenge Massey, criticizing him for being against the continuing resolution. However, Massey has been a budget hawk for years and notably takes no money from AIPAC. He's standing up against the Israel-first agenda that Trump and many others in Washington support.

President Trump's administration is uncovering wasteful spending, like millions on sex changes in Guatemala, girl-centric climate change in Brazil, and social media influencers in Ukraine. Even worse, hundreds of thousands were spent on sending designers to a Paris fashion show. Instead of funding these crazy projects, let's redirect that money to secure our border. Fiscal conservatives are proposing to increase spending, but there's a way to cut it. It's called rescission. The administration can bundle savings and send it to us for a simple majority vote, no Democrats needed. There's a debate about whether our biggest threats are internal or external. I believe they're internal. We don't need unlimited military spending or to be everywhere in the world. If we want more money for the military, take it from overseas spending like climate change initiatives. We're giving billions to dictatorships without elections.

Congress released a 1,012-page bill with a $1 trillion price tag full of questionable spending. Examples include $850,000 for a gay senior citizen home in Boston, $15 million for Egyptian college tuition, and $400,000 for a group teaching elementary school kids about being trans. Even a posthumous earmark for Dianne Feinstein. The bill also includes $500,000 for an anti-racist nature program at the San Diego Zoo. This bill, signed by Biden, will spend taxpayer money recklessly.

It's ironic that those criticizing President Trump's audit of federal spending are the same ones who wanted to hire 80,000 IRS agents to audit Americans under President Biden. The battle lines are drawn: some colleagues support bureaucracy and spending over the American taxpayer. This isn't just Democrats; many in Washington D.C. have circled the wagons to support spending and bureaucrats over taxpayers. They have a right to be foolish, but these are the same people who chose to support illegal immigration over the rule of law.

I recorded a video after leaving the house floor, but it didn't go well. I voted against the bill because we had agreed on separate bills, yet everything was combined. It included $5.7 billion for submarines, $100 million for the Coast Guard, and funding for the Francis Scott Key Bridge, which seems unnecessary since the barge that hit it was insured. The $100 million for disaster relief raises questions about its allocation. We don't trust this administration with funds, especially after recent aid to Ecuador and Ukraine without our input. It's just a continuation of poor spending policies. Interestingly, many Democrats who opposed it ended up voting for it, which feels misleading. Despite this, the government remains open. Wishing everyone a Merry Christmas and a happy Hanukkah to my Jewish friends. Thank you for your support.

- The speakers criticize a new funding bill as a bloated, bipartisan package totaling over $1.7 trillion, arguing it represents a “middle finger” to American taxpayers and funds more than merely keeping the lights on. They claim both parties supported it, eliminating any real fiscal fight. - They highlight a provision referred to as health care extenders on page 772, noting that temporary pandemic expansions in health and welfare programs are now baked in as permanent costs for taxpayers. This is presented as evidence that eligibility expansions for Medicare are being locked in. - They point to Israel-related spending buried within the bill, noting provisions allocating hundreds of millions of dollars for Israeli missile defense programs, including the Iron Dome, on page 101 of the 1,059-page bill. They argue that funding the U.S. government is linked to funding a foreign defense system, and that this represents corporate welfare for well-connected interests in Washington. - The discussion asserts that Ukraine-related funding is not explicitly in the bill as written, but that money may still be funneled through contractors or other channels. They question whether there will be a final victory lap on supposedly winding down Ukraine aid, suggesting money remains flowing covertly. - They discuss the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and USAID, noting that money for NED remained in the bill despite amendments to cut funding. They describe NED as a non-partisan tool that has supported regime-change activities, including actions in Iran and Venezuela, and criticize both parties for preserving this funding. - They critique the consolidation of aid into the State Department, specifically via USAID under Marco Rubio, arguing that oversight has weakened and that funding is redirected for various foreign policy aims (e.g., Venezuela, Cuba, Iran). They discuss the influence of Rubio on where funds go and describe the arrangement as increasing executive-led control with limited transparency. - They argue that the bill reflects a broader pattern of government spending: a so-called “uni-party” consensus that avoids reducing government size, with both parties acting in lockstep on foreign and domestic priorities. - The conversation touches on public opinion, citing a Gallup poll that suggests younger generations despise both major parties, and they link this to perceived bipartisan over-spending and interventionism. - Throughout, the viewers criticize what they see as a routine of declaring emergencies and then normalizing permanent programs, suggesting that emergency measures become permanent and that the political system uses crisis rhetoric to justify ongoing expenditure. - The discussion ends with remarks on political leadership, labeling Speaker Johnson as a weak figure and coining a proposed “fuck it party” as a first-principles anti-war alternative, with participants noting they would join or support it. Daniel McAdams provided expert commentary throughout.

In the post from earlier today, two Republicans voted nay to stall the government funding bill, but it ended up being only one again: Thomas Massey. The comments that followed labeled Massey a rhino, a democrat, and a grandstander. The speaker then presents Massey’s own explanation for voting against the omnibus, highlighting a breakdown of what Massey calls the most ridiculous items included, including some “America first” items that were not. Massey’s stated rationale includes: - $5,000,000,000 to provide cash benefits, health care, day care, and job programs to refugees on the taxpayer dime. - $315,000,000 to fund the CIA’s branch of the State Department that propagandizes and destabilizes the globe and has an interest in censoring and attacking conservative media outlets. - $3,300,000,000 to our greatest ally, President Trump, with an extra $500,000,000 for the greatest ally. - $1,500,000,000 to Egypt. - $2,100,000,000 to the Jordanians. - Nearly $700,000,000 to foreign HIV/AIDS programs. - Additional items described as America first that Massey says they refused to include. Massey also cites amendments he would have supported but were blocked: - The amendment to freeze funds for the daycare fraud. - The amendment to stop warrantless surveillance of Americans via loopholes in the FISA act. - The amendment to prevent the kill switch on your personal vehicle. - The amendment to end propagandizing US citizens by the State Department and the US Agency for Global Media. - The amendment to stop the creation of CBNCs (which relates to financial surveillance and control of your wall). - The Save Act was included by someone, described as “Grimstander” in the narrative. The discourse portrays Massey as a traitor to America and a grandstander, with tweets and reactions framing him as disloyal to President Trump. The speaker’s compilation emphasizes that if Massey is called a traitor for these positions, others might be viewed similarly, urging readers to compare actions across the broader political landscape.

Last night, the Senate voted on a budget, and I introduced an amendment to cut $1.5 trillion, about the amount of waste, fraud, and corruption we've uncovered. Every Democrat voted against it, unsurprisingly, but 29 Republicans joined them, while only 24 Republicans voted for it. Here's a list of the 29 Republicans who betrayed you to continue the fraud, waste, and corruption. If you see your senator on this list, call them and tell them we don't care if the government shuts down or what sacred cows need to be sacrificed to balance the budget. If they're not willing to do the job, they should resign. Marsha Blackburn from Tennessee, your office will be hearing from me soon.

House Republicans are prioritizing Elon Musk's interests over those of everyday Americans. Their opposition to transparency is baffling, especially for a party claiming to represent the people. The argument that access is needed to combat misinformation is misleading; the individuals involved are treasury employees, not external actors manipulating the system. The Republicans' actions demonstrate a lack of concern for the American people and their tax dollars. Full transparency on government spending is necessary to prove otherwise.

USAID is a fraud and a slush fund for left-wing projects globally, with very little being put to good use. This occurs while denying funds to those who clearly need them, with only cents on the dollar reaching those in need. USAID was initially created for humanitarian purposes, but it has been captured by the military-industrial complex, becoming a sinister propagator of totalitarianism and war. The US government, through USAID, has funded things like DEI initiatives in Serbia, gender surgeries worldwide, sex change surgeries in Guatemala, and social media influencers in Ukraine. USAID is using taxpayer dollars to fund opposition and subvert democracy in other countries. USAID and the CIA don't promote democracy; they are run by radical lunatics that we are working to remove. As an American taxpayer, I don't want my dollars going towards this.

- Speaker 0 says, "Are you aware that we are sending $40,000,000 a week to the Taliban?" - Speaker 1 responds, "Yes, sir. Can you name other instances of foreign aid going to terrorist organizations? We have assisted Al Shabaab in Somalia. There's been instances of the Hamzee network in Sudan, Hamas, Islamic Jihad Hezbollah, Kafaiba Hezbollah, Hayat Tahrir al Shams in Syria. Dozens of terror organizations have received indirect assistance from US foreign aid." - Speaker 0 adds, "You know, I'm wondering with all this talk about the Strait Of Hermos and Park Island and everything Lindsey's recommending, why are we listening to a traitor who needs to be arrested to funneling money to have a mosque and Al Qaeda through USAID. He's helping to support the enemies of our nation's food, and it's time to arrest him. He's a traitor."

Let's put aside the fear mongering. No one in the Trump administration has advocated using Social Security money for other purposes. However, there are real questions about spending. The other side calls funding pauses illegal, but pausing spending for a month isn't impoundment. This is a separation of powers issue. I voted against repurposing money for the wall. When money was stopped at USAID, $2,000,000 was found for sex changes in Guatemala. Should a president be able to execute their policy? The bureaucracy is unmovable and skewed towards spending more. Should we spend millions on things like girl-centric climate change in Brazil or microaggressions among obese Latinx individuals? Scrutiny is good. I want the discovery of waste to lead to permanent change. The minority party likely won't want to cut funding for things like sex changes in Guatemala. If we can save money, like $200,000,000 on an aircraft carrier, we should do a rescission package and fill our $2,000,000,000,000 deficit.

USAID, originally created by President Kennedy, has been hijacked by a far-left agenda, marked by wasteful spending and anti-American priorities. Democrats show no concern over this misuse of funds, perhaps because scrutiny has led to a surge in searches for criminal defense attorneys. President Trump's attempt to pause this spending was met with accusations of a constitutional crisis, while the real crisis is the misuse of taxpayer money. USAID programs sabotage diplomatic relationships by pushing woke ideology, even weaponizing programs like PEPFAR by demanding African nations compromise their values for aid. Furthermore, claims that Elon Musk, who possesses a top-secret clearance, has access to personal data are false, and the left's disparaging remarks about young people serving the country are offensive. Their service matters.

Under president Biden, they were spending $3,000,000 for circumcisions and vasectomies in Zambia; we took that out. The congresswoman says, we're gonna shut down government till you put that back in. We found $500,000 for electric buses in Rwanda and $3,600,000 for pastry cooking classes and dance focus groups for male prostitutes in Haiti—again, we took it out. Ocasio Cortez and the socialist wing of the Democratic Party say we gotta put these back in or shut the government down. They demand: $6,000,000 for media organizations for the Palestinians; $833,000 for transgender people in Nepal; $4,200,000 for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex people in the Western Balkans and Uganda. We took all that out; it upsets Ocasio Cortez, and they threaten all other Democrats to shut down the government till they get what they want.

What's the deal with those dadgum NGOs? Nongovernment organizations. 'They're not nongovernment because you and I fund it. We borrow the money to send to them.' Afghanistan, for instance, where we had the bill to defund the Taliban. 'In the senate now, but and the other side, oh, man, they pitched a fit when we added NGOs. We're cutting them off.' 'Do you really believe we're spending $10,000,000 on a dadgum drag show? Where's the money go?' 'Afghanistan alone, over a thousand nongovernment organizations are working out.' 'There’s a paper trail.' 'Somebody's gonna find out about it, but we know it probably goes into dark money campaigns, fighting good Republicans as well.' 'And thank you Donald Trump and JD Vance.' Dadgummit.

There are no Doge cuts, and this is not USAID. The speaker is talking about waste and fraud, specifically in Medicaid, and claims no one has been turned over to the DOJ for fraud. Elon Musk gave false hope to a political class that doesn't want to cut anything. The big bill has problems, but it passed because Musk promised a trillion dollars. The rescission next week is $9 billion, with $2 billion from PBS and NPR. There's supposedly $7 billion in fraud on a $7 trillion budget. Musk committed $1 trillion to the President, leading to questions about whether it's all "BS."

USAID, initially created by Kennedy, has become a front for a far-left agenda, marked by wasteful spending and anti-American priorities. Democrats show no concern over this misuse of funds, which makes me believe there is an attempt to conceal the corruption. Trump's attempt to pause this spending was met with cries of a constitutional crisis. Many USAID programs undermine diplomatic relationships by pushing woke ideology, as seen with PEPFAR, where the Biden administration jeopardized lives by imposing abortion agendas on African nations. Those complicit in this betrayal should be fired. Also, it's false that Elon Musk, who has a top-secret clearance for his work with NASA, has access to personal data. Finally, it's offensive to dismiss the capabilities of young people serving our country. Their service matters and should be respected.

Just left the house floor where we passed the National Defense Authorization Act. I voted against it due to $500 million in foreign aid, which many opposed. There are provisions for travel related to abortions and poorly written transgender language that could worsen issues. The Pentagon still hasn't passed an audit after multiple attempts, and we need to do better. This isn't what you voted for, and there are lobbyists involved that affect these decisions. We’ll keep fighting, but it's crucial for you to hold us accountable. Thank you for your support.

Republican Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massey said he could vote yes on President Trump's "big beautiful bill" if a "skinny version" materializes, as he believes the current bill doesn't cut government spending enough. Massey's opposition has led to threats of primary challenges from Trump allies and AIPAC. Massey suggested splitting the bill into two, focusing on border security and extending the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. He would also want a repeal of Green New Deal subsidies. Massey is using a shorter window to score the bill's impact on the deficit, looking at three to four years instead of the typical ten. He alleges the House is "treading water" while awaiting the Senate's version. An ad criticizing Massey claims he voted against Trump's policies, including banning sex changes on minors. Massey says the bill allows funding for sex changes for minors. He says the bill does not prohibit welfare for illegal aliens, stop funding sex changes for kids, end registration of suppressors, defund Planned Parenthood for 10, implement the RAINS Act, or reduce the deficit.

We filed the continued resolution on Saturday, but the House Democrats leadership team released a statement on Friday panning a bill they hadn't even seen yet. They claimed it would cut funding for healthcare, nutritional assistance, and veterans benefits. But every single word of that is a lie. The clean CR contains no policy riders at all, no cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security, and no cuts to veterans benefits. In fact, we plus up the accounts for veterans. I'm asking reporters to call out Democrats for making these intentionally false claims. The American people deserve clarity from our press corps.