reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The Trump administration ordered the Department of Education building to be vacated by 6:00 PM and closed the following day. The speaker asserts that massive cuts and layoffs are expected at the Department of Education. The speaker claims that eliminating the Department of Education is a primary goal of Project 2025, with the aim to cut education funding to the states. According to the speaker, the Trump administration and Christian nationalists want an uneducated populace to make them easier to control as slave labor for billionaires. They allegedly don't want people to have critical thinking skills because an uneducated populace is easier to control.

A large portion of Columbia's students are international and pay full tuition, which brings up a couple of questions. Why are American taxpayers funding the education of non-Americans, especially after reports of significant federal grant reductions? Also, what is the real direction of our cultural exchange? Harvard recently froze hiring, which is interesting considering where federal grants are usually allocated. The professors who are most vocal in supporting protests and opposing the administration are not the ones who will be affected by Trump pulling grant funding. This could create internal conflict within universities between researchers who just want to focus on their work and those who are willing to fight the administration.

There are executive orders related to diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives that are currently on hold, so we don't need to evaluate their potential impact right now due to ongoing litigation and uncertainty. Of the three executive orders regarding education, only two are relevant, as the third pertains to higher education. One executive order, issued on January 29, aims to cut federal funding for schools teaching what the administration terms gender ideology and critical race theory. However, it includes the phrase "consistent with applicable law," offering flexibility in interpretation. The power for educational curriculum remains with the states. Federal law prohibits the federal government from interfering in state and local decisions about K-12 curriculum, and no executive order can override that.

The federal government is reportedly looking to hire up to 1,200 new diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) bureaucrats before Trump takes office. This move appears to be an effort to undermine the incoming administration, similar to actions like auctioning off border wall pieces and signing long-term union contracts. Even some Democrats have acknowledged that DEI initiatives have been divisive and ineffective. The job listings are available on usajobs.gov, adding to the existing DEI personnel in the government. These new hires will become part of the permanent civil service, making it challenging for Trump to remove them once he takes office. This situation seems to reflect a strategy by the deep state to sabotage the Trump administration.

James O'Keefe reports on James Welch, a genetic counselor at the NIH, who appears to be manipulating language in research applications to circumvent government oversight, specifically from "Doge," by avoiding "banned words" like "women" and "race." Welch suggests using "ancestry" instead of "race" and making race a secondary objective. According to O'Keefe, this circumvention introduces political bias into science and could be a Hatch Act violation. Welch expresses disdain for Robert F. Kennedy Jr., his boss, and suggests replacing Trump's portrait with Putin's. He mentions potential NIH job cuts due to "Doge" and references his mother advising against violence, stating he is kept too far from people at work.

I work in a federally grant-funded position, and at our recent department meeting, we discussed the ongoing impact of the federal funding freeze. Despite a judge blocking the freeze, the administration isn't fully compliant, leading to continued grant cancellations and freezes across various sectors. The initial day the funding portals were blocked significantly disrupted the funding schedules for numerous organizations. Furthermore, many projects are stalled due to the required removal of DEI language. This necessitates extensive rewrites of proposals that have been in progress for months. Essentially, it's a way to impede funding without an outright freeze by making the process extremely difficult.

The speaker denies inventing the state law banning DEI in higher education. Student-funded programs are not affected by changes in regulation and law. Programs are being moved to student activity fee funding to circumvent the ban. Department money cannot be used for outreach and education, but partnerships with student government are allowed. Although scholarships are taxpayer-funded, student funding is not affected by regulation. The name of DEI programs may be adjusted for logistical and political purposes. The goal is to maintain services for students, despite potential adjustments to program names.

President Trump signed executive orders eliminating DEI programs, and federal offices are canceling DEI initiatives. Some people lost their jobs because they were hired exclusively to run DEI programs. However, similar cancellations occurred during Trump's previous presidency, and people worked around them by renaming DEI activities as multicultural activities or team building. Concerns arise about writing proposals with terms like "climate change" due to the administration's disbelief in it. A proposed solution is to replace "climate change" with terms like "natural hazards" to secure funding. Despite potential funding cuts, there's hope that space-related programs will remain funded due to Trump's interest in space exploration. Earth science programs may be defunded. People are trying to come up with alternative terms for climate change.

The EPA headquarters in DC houses a museum, built and curated by the Biden administration for $4 million, dedicated to environmental justice and climate change. Its annual operating cost is $600,000. The museum's timeline omits any mention of President Trump's first administration. From May 2024 through the previous month, the museum had 1,909 public visitors, costing taxpayers $315 per visitor. Due to low public attendance and high operating costs, the museum will be shut down. This decision aims to be an exceptional steward of taxpayer dollars. The agency will focus on providing cleaner, healthier, and safer land, air, and water without spending over half a million dollars on a museum presenting an ideologically slanted story of the EPA. The speaker claims that under President Trump, the practice of burning tax dollars on pet projects will end.

I work on environmental climate policy, focusing on implementation at the EPA. My work involves allocating the approved billions of dollars, ensuring the funds are used properly and create good jobs. Currently, the focus is on distributing the money as quickly as possible before the new administration takes over and potentially interferes. We're trying to get the money out to nonprofits, states, tribes, and cities before the inauguration on January 20th. After that date, the new administration could halt all grants and reevaluate the programs. The goal is to get the money to organizations that can continue the work, even if the government changes its policies.

"We can't directly fund DEI programming, we have been looking for loopholes." "It's not. No," "So we have been looking for loopholes." "we have some funds through our PBI grant that we would like to dedicate to that." "we had to discontinue the law DEIP." "Like with Florida when you're not having to completely go away it's just that you can't use state funds." "Part of that would be payroll funds." "They come from the state. Do they not?" "Most of them do. Yes." "It's a marketing thing essentially." "It's just 90% of it from a communication standpoint you understand that." "Ours is already being funded through our PBI grant, which is a federally funded initiative." "We will catch you."

For context, USAID has been around for more than sixty years with bipartisan support, earmarks in every budget, and a workforce of about 10 to 14,000 staff, plus roughly $40,000,000,000 in procurement each year. We read Project Twenty Twenty Five and felt somewhat prepared for this administration in some ways, but not in others. Ahead of the inauguration, the Office of Transition Initiatives (OTI), which works in countries transitioning from authoritarian or wartime to more peaceful and structured governments, was a major player and had organized during the previous administration to respond to threats to U.S. democracy. Also notable to our group, including our gender and sexual minorities employee resource group, is that we had moved our group away from the USAID main systems into Signal chats to protect the community there. January 20, the inauguration, brought one of 200 executive orders to stop foreign assistance, creating a ninety-day pause on all funding. In addition, there were executive orders to stop DEI programming, which affected a large number of our awards immediately. In that first week, we experienced threatening emails across staff, a takeover of the DEIA, truth@opm.gov email address, which was unusual in its centralization to all government staff, and many staff under a particular hiring mechanism were immediately put on furlough or laid off. I am part of that hiring mechanism. Within that initial period, over the weekend, our senior staff, including our general counsel, were put on administrative leave. In response, we moved quickly to establish the USAID stop work order website and a Signal group, organized by a longtime implementing partner and strategic communications specialists. They moved immediately to begin gathering people, creating community, and collecting information. This is also when some of the first lawsuits began to be discussed. In the second weekend, additional Signal groups were stood up. USAID is an agency of about 10 to 14,000 people within the United States, and we have about 50,000 people who are hired into the ecosystem of awards and grants contracted by USAID. This community began gathering in Signal, especially as disinformation about USAID emerged from X (Elon Musk’s platform) and escalated attacks. In that second week after the administration, almost all USAID staff were put on administrative leave, including our ethics lawyers, our HR, and our security. DOES took over, and our buildings were closed. By February 5, we had our first large-scale protest organized, with several congressional leaders standing up with us along with agency leadership. Many developments followed, and I will discuss those next.

People often say they didn't vote for Elon Musk, but they did, as Trump made it clear that Musk, Bobby, and Tulsi are part of the team. Once they're on the team, they can't be removed. We've taken your advice and consent, and now it's time to move forward with making America great again. The recent actions with USAID are just the beginning. Expect significant changes ahead, particularly within the US Department of Education and the National Endowment for the Arts. What lies beneath these organizations is alarming, especially concerning the intelligence community. Stay tuned for more updates.

O'Keefe Media Group reported on a secretly recorded meeting with the president of Florida Institute of Technology, John Niklow, concerning DEI and funding. Niklow allegedly changed wording to circumvent a presidential executive order and retain funding. Niklow reportedly obtained $7,000,000 in funding after a meeting with a state official, where he tweaked language related to climate change. The university president allegedly went against the deal made in that meeting. Niklow stated that changing words allows them to continue their work and avoid being targeted. Another professor, Julia Constopoulos, discussed renaming courses with Niklow. Niklow advised modifying branding or finding new funding sources. He also stated that the government isn't smart and is just searching the web for DEI courses. O'Keefe Media Group was asked to leave the premises and told to remain on the sidewalk. A cease and desist letter was sent to O'Keefe Media Group.

DEI initiatives at the Defense Department are being eliminated. The focus will return to a merit-based, color-blind approach, emphasizing equality, high standards, and accountability in military readiness and lethality. The idea that "diversity is our strength" is rejected; instead, unity and shared purpose are highlighted as the true strengths of the military. The Pentagon is moving quickly to implement these changes, and those unwilling to adapt can seek employment elsewhere. Diversity, equity, and inclusion will no longer be part of the Defense Department's mission.

The administration plans to rewrite CAFE standards to lower vehicle prices, claiming Elon Musk approves. They eliminated the "social cost of carbon" to reduce infrastructure expenses. Funding will be withheld from states/cities with policies that don't "follow the law," including DEI, illegal driver's licenses, and sanctuary status, requiring certification of legal compliance for project funding. Research funding for "equitable and sustainable transportation systems" is being pulled from universities. An agreement is being worked on with the air traffic control union to retain retirement-eligible controllers and increase student enrollment in Oklahoma City to address the shortage of 3,000 controllers. The current air traffic control system has obsolete equipment due to the prior administration's wasteful spending. The plan is to implement a brand new air traffic control system.

Donald Trump is making numerous appointments and sharing his plans frequently, but there's no need to engage with his divisive rhetoric. He talks about shutting down the Department of Education, which would have severe consequences for special education, but he hasn't taken action yet. The process to shut it down is complex, and there are ways to make it more difficult for him. I'm consulting with legal experts to develop strategies, and I will share those plans with everyone. Together, we can work to counteract his proposals. There is still hope, and we will make it challenging for him to implement his agenda. Stay strong.

We can't directly fund DEI programming, so we have been looking for loopholes. The discussion centers on circumventing state law to fund DEI. "We have been looking for loopholes." "So part of this position would be working with some of that. We have some funds through our PBI grant that we would like to dedicate to that." They say the work will continue under a different title because "we had to discontinue the law DEIP" to keep state funding. They explain "Payroll funds are funds that are used. She's used to pay people. Sure." "They come from the state. Do they not?" "Most of them do. Yes." They indicate funding can come from federal sources via "PBI grant," a federally funded initiative. They call it "a marketing thing essentially." They warn taxpayers: "We will catch you."

Speaker 0 advises the top 3 in the Navy on equal opportunity, diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). The new chief of naval operations, Admiral Lisa Franchetti, believes in DEI. Speaker 0 believes that if Trump becomes president, their job will still exist, but they would skirt around DEI and instead emphasize equal opportunity. Speaker 0 believes DEI efforts will be irrelevant when a missile hits. They express confusion about the focus on DEI, with some believing it's a waste of time. China is considered the biggest threat, not Israel and Gaza. A war with China could escalate into a world war. If Trump wins, equal opportunity will remain, but the language will shift away from DEI. Speaker 0 believes Trump will win unless something drastic happens, citing a lack of faith in Biden and his age.

There is confusion regarding the impact of a sweeping order on public benefit programs, which remains unaffected, as clarified by OMB. The federal workforce, consisting of 2 million employees, is predominantly left-leaning, as evidenced by donations to candidates like Kamala Harris. This raises concerns about bias. The American people voted for significant change with Donald Trump, who needs to gain control over government spending, particularly discretionary grants not directed by Congress. These funds could be used for projects like unnecessary constructions or funding studies abroad. It’s crucial for political appointees to review these expenditures to ensure accountability, despite any misleading reports from left-wing media.

We've cut $4,000,000 in DEI contracts here at HUD. These contracts were intended for culture transformation, outward mindset thinking, and subscription services. This money should be used to serve the American people and ensure that our time is well spent serving those we are called to serve. DEI at HUD is dead.

Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 discuss the politicization of science and changes at the NIH. Over the last fifteen to twenty years, the NIH incorporated what Speaker 1 characterizes as political agendas rather than scientific agendas into its portfolio, with DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) being the most prominent example. A chunk of NIH funding went to projects focused on achieving social objectives rather than the health mission. Every NIH employee allegedly had to write a loyalty oath to DEI principles and was evaluated on devotion to the cause. Researchers inside and outside the NIH could access funds, with outside researchers more easily securing money if they promised to conduct DEI research, according to Speaker 1. Much of that research allegedly lacked a real scientific basis and was not science. Speaker 1 provides an example of projects they worked to deprioritize: a project asking whether structural racism is the root reason why African Americans have worse hypertension outcomes. The problem, they say, is that there is no way to test the hypothesis because, if structural racism is the cause, there is no workable control group to test the idea as true. They assert that such research did not translate into better health for anybody, including minority populations. They describe these projects as political agendas that do not belong in a science agency. The stated mission is to improve the health of everybody, including minority populations, but only if projects are clearly scientific, well defined, and have a real chance of improving health. Speaker 0 asks for clarification, summarizing that there were ideological or political projects receiving NIH funding. Speaker 1 confirms and adds another practice: when a good science project ended the year with leftover funds, program officers would approach researchers with leftover money and offer a “diversity supplement”—an add-on tied to DEI that was not actual science—to obtain extra funding. This, they claim, was a waste of taxpayer money with no real health benefit. They say they have since gotten rid of all of that.

If we were seen as a sanctuary program, especially one using federal dollars, we'd face a lot of problems. To avoid scrutiny, we strategically omit status inquiries from our federal statutes by subtly influencing bill language in congress. Now, with the new efficiency team's surveillance, communication has moved offline to encrypted apps like Signal, even though we're not supposed to conduct business there. They've installed software to track keystrokes and monitor our calls. If I end up on leave, I'm headed to the beach, taxpayer money well spent! Many in administrative roles are already leaving since we can't do much anyway. If I'm in Mexico, don't worry about it.

Federal offices are ending DEI programs due to President Trump's executive orders, mirroring a previous instance where DEI was rebranded as "multicultural activities" or "team building" to circumvent restrictions. State departments have already canceled DEI initiatives. Concerns arise about writing proposals using terms like "climate change" due to potential disapproval from the administration, with suggestions to replace it with "natural hazards." This strategy was previously used to secure funding. While NASA's overall funding may remain intact due to Trump's interest in space, Earth science funding is expected to decrease. There is uncertainty and concern about the future, with some expressing a lack of hope for the coming year.