TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

Speaker says USAID funding amounts to terrorism. He notes $697,000,000 annually, plus shipments of cash funds Madrasas, ISIS, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, ISIS Khorazan, terrorist training camps. If you think that the program under operation enduring Sentinel entitled Women's Scholarship Endowment ($60,000,000 annually) or the Young Women Lead ($5,000,000 annually) is going to women— inspector general's report says the Taliban does not allow women to speak in public. He asserts Americans are told this funds women, but 'You are funding terrorism, and it's coming through USAID.' He adds USAID spent $8,840,000,000 in the last twenty years on Pakistan's education related program, including $136,000,000 to build 120 schools with zero evidence any were built; inspector general can't get in to see them. They spent $20,000,000 to create educational television programs for children unable to attend the school; 'You paid for it. Somebody else got the money. You are paying for terrorism.'

We're sending millions in cash to Afghanistan, even weekly shipments of $40-80 million, to folks like the Haqqani network. This is on top of the $697 million annually, funding madrasas, ISIS, Al Qaeda, and terrorist training camps. Programs like the Women's Scholarship Endowment aren't helping women; they're funding terrorism through USAID. We're essentially paying welfare to Taliban martyrs' families, while American families who lost loved ones get nothing. Some argue this prevents them from joining ISIS, but it's a lie to justify funding our enemies. The US government has been backing these groups since the late '70s, using them against other countries and even against us. It's a setup for America's collapse.

Speaker 0 contends that NGOs (nongovernment organizations) are not truly nongovernmental because they are funded by borrowing money and by money from donors, including billionaires. He claims they receive a large amount of funding, and the process involves borrowing funds and then distributing them to NGOs. He uses Afghanistan as an example, noting that there was a bill to defund the Taliban and that in the Senate there was opposition to adding NGOs to that effort. He argues that billionaire adversaries of the United States will put money into groups with fancy names (citing “feed the children” as a possible example)—a million dollars to start, which is "pennies on their dollars" for these donors. He asserts that these NGOs apply for federal money, and then an unelected bureaucrat in Washington declares them legitimate, leading to billions of dollars flowing to these organizations. Speaker 0 states that in Afghanistan alone, there are over a thousand nongovernment organizations operating there, and when combined with United Nations operations, the number could be multiples of thousands. He questions whether the money is being spent on certain events, asking, “do you really believe we're spending $10,000,000 on a dadgum drag show?” and asserts that the money ends up back in politicians’ pockets, with a paper trail that someone will uncover, though he believes it probably goes into dark money campaigns that oppose good Republicans as well. He concludes that this situation “has got to stop.” He ends by thanking Donald Trump and JD Vance.

The speaker claims the U.S. has given close to $5 billion to the Taliban via NGOs, and this continues. They allege this money cycles back to Washington, with a paper trail that Elon Musk has alluded to. The speaker believes USAID money goes "almost a %" right back to Democrat campaign coffers, with some Republicans also possibly benefiting. They state that Republican leadership is upset about these claims but acknowledges their truth. The speaker also questions how Joe Biden could have reviewed 8,000 pardon files, suggesting "payola" and shadiness in Washington D.C., particularly across various departments.

I've found some questionable expenditures by USAID, like the $3,000,000 given to a rap artist in Gaza who was producing anti-Israel, anti-Semitic songs. Is that really the best way to use American taxpayer money? I don't think so. During tomorrow's hearing, we will be addressing this issue, as well as the fact that the woke ideology that USAID is pushing in various parts of the world is not welcomed.

USAID, with 10,000 employees and a $40 billion annual budget, has drawn scrutiny for its spending. Examples cited include funding for electric vehicles in Vietnam, a transgender clinic in India, and $1.5 million to a Serbian LGBTQ group. A Middle East Forum study revealed $164 million to radical organizations globally, including $122 million to groups linked to terrorist organizations. Millions were also allocated to sex changes in Guatemala, a Sesame Street show in Iraq, combating misinformation in Kazakhstan, and meals to a group linked to Al Qaeda. Further examples include funding for LGBT advocacy in Jamaica, rebuilding Cuba's media, and projects related to gendered language in Sri Lanka and disability inclusion in Belarus. These expenditures raise questions about the agency's priorities and oversight.

There's significant fraud in USAID, with radical groups receiving funds they don't deserve. A staggering amount, like a hundred million, is being misallocated. It's crucial to investigate the kickbacks associated with this spending. Who would invest such sums in questionable projects? It's likely that those who received the funds are not returning any to the government, indicating a high level of corruption. The key issue is understanding the extent of these kickbacks.

Speaker 0: Just recent report, it's not proven, but the surveillance enough suggests 300,000 people have already died from just this cut off, this hard cut of USAID. So there's food rotting in boats, in warehouses. There is this this this will fuck you off. This will not you will not be happy. No American will. But there is, I think it's 50,000 tons of food that are stored in Djibouti, South Africa, Dubai, and wait for it, Houston, Texas. And that is rotting rather than going to Gaza, rather than going to Sudan because the people who know the codes are for the warehouse, the the the are fired. They're gone. And so this I don't know. I just it's and what do you think? What what what is what is that? That's that's now America, is it? Speaker 1: Well, they're throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Speaker 0: Right. Speaker 1: Right? This is the problem. The problem is, for sure, there have been a lot of organizations that do tremendous good all throughout the world. Also, for sure, it was a money laundering operation. For sure, there was no oversight. For sure, billions of dollars are missing. In fact, trillions that are unaccounted for, that were sent off into various they they they don't even know where because there's no receipts. The way Elon Musk described it, he said if any of this was done by a public company, the company would be delisted and the executives would be imprisoned. But in The United States, this is standard. When Biden left office, when it was clear that Trump won in the seventy three days, they spent $93,000,000,000 from the Department of Energy on just radical loans, just throwing money into places. Right. And there's no no oversight, no receipts. Like, the the whole thing is it's there's a lot of fraud, a lot of money laundering.

Musk uncovered that American taxpayers fund foreign aid, including significant amounts to countries like Afghanistan, Yemen, and Syria. The USAID employs 10,000 people and distributes $40 billion annually. Notably, taxpayer money supported electric vehicles in Vietnam, a transgender clinic in India, and an LGBTQ group in Serbia. A report revealed that USAID allocated $164 million to radical organizations, including $122 million to those linked to foreign terrorist groups, and millions to Gaza organizations controlled by Hamas. Other expenditures included $2 million for sex changes in Guatemala, $20 million for a new Sesame Street show in Iraq, and $8 million for teaching Sri Lankan journalists about gendered language. Additionally, funds were given for LGBT advocacy in Jamaica, rebuilding Cuban media, and equity education in Nepal. Many are upset with Musk for exposing this, but some believe he deserves recognition.

Good morning, Daniel. We’ve got a lot to cover today. A Ukrainian organization, Texty, funded by the US government, has published a list of Americans deemed enemies for opposing increased aid to Ukraine. This list includes many of our friends and colleagues, highlighting the troubling misuse of US funds. Furthermore, the US participated in an Israeli raid that killed over 270 Palestinians, raising serious questions about US authority and the proportionality of the response. Congress should demand answers about both these incidents. Thomas Massie’s claim that every Republican has an AIPAC “babysitter” influencing their votes reveals the extent of foreign lobbying. Public opinion is shifting against sending weapons to Israel, yet Congress remains unresponsive. Despite the bleak outlook, we remain hopeful and invite you to our Liberty Platform event on October 31st in Dulles, Virginia. We need to advocate for a non-interventionist foreign policy and bring our troops home.

Judicial Watch is in court regarding a Gaza cover-up involving USAID, where the recipients of cash in Gaza are being hidden. The State Department claims revealing the recipients would endanger them, implying potential Israeli retaliation. The Biden administration allegedly gave money to Gaza, and in court, it was argued that Judicial Watch waived its rights to access the specific names of those who received funds from the grant recipient. While Catholic Relief Services, which received $7,000,000, was identified, the groups in Gaza to which they distributed the money are being withheld. Judicial Watch plans to file another FOIA lawsuit to uncover who received USAID money in Gaza. They claim this is a Biden cover-up enabled by the Justice Department. The speaker expresses outrage, asserting that the Trump administration would not want to conceal this information. They believe USAID is providing support to terrorists and accuses the State and Justice Departments of playing a shell game.

Democrats are defending questionable spending priorities, including $1.5 million for DEI initiatives in Serbia, $20 million for Iraqi Sesame Street, and millions on projects in Afghanistan that failed, like a dam that was never used. USAID has been criticized for funding programs that seem wasteful or ineffective, such as a million dollars for bat research in Wuhan and support for Fashion Week in Paris. Allegations suggest that USAID operates like a dark money entity, with ties to various foundations and questionable contracts, including one involving Hunter Biden. Billions have been funneled into open borders groups, effectively funding illegal immigration.

The speaker was asked if there is evidence that Maxine Waters, Adam Schiff, and Chuck Schumer have received money directly from USAID. The speaker responded that taxpayer money is sent to government organizations, then to NGOs, which are government-funded but not governed by U.S. laws. Money is sent overseas to NGOs and the speaker is confident that some of it returns to the U.S. and ends up with the aforementioned politicians. The speaker states that it's not a direct route, but that some members of Congress are strangely wealthy, accumulating millions while earning significantly less annually, which is unexplainable. The speaker says they are going to try to figure it out and stop it from happening.

"In the past three years, Americans have paid more for Israel's defense budget than Israelis themselves, according to the Israeli army's former chief of staff." "The United States gave nearly $3,100,000,000 to Israel this year, making it the number one contributor of American foreign aid." "And yet during this time, we're giving a huge amount of money to Israel." "Israel ranks among the top 30 richest countries in the world, while some of the poorest countries only see a fraction of that amount in USAID." "According to the Congressional Research Center, once dispersed, Israel's military aid is transferred to an interest bearing account with the Federal Reserve Bank." "This means Americans are paying interest on the billions of dollars given to Israel, while Israel accumulates interest on those same billions."

The discussion centers on the fragile peace deal and the ongoing conflict with Hamas, with emphasis on Hamas’ true nature, disarmament, hostage issues, humanitarian aid, and regional dynamics including Lebanon and Iran. - Hamas remains a terrorist organization. The interlocutor states that Hamas has not changed its stripe and is using the ceasefire to reassert control in Gaza through mass executions of those opposed or suspected of working with Israel, while attempting to rebuild its strength. The plan, in partnership with Netanyahu, is to disarm Hamas, dismantle its terror infrastructure, and build Gaza into something different, a top priority under the Trump plan. - The peace deal is a work in progress. Neither Israel, the United States, nor other actors expect Hamas to act in good faith. The discussion emphasizes that if Hamas does not disarm, it will be eradicated, a statement framed as a serious US commitment reflecting the nature of the war and regional determination to end Hamas as a threat. - The 20-stage plan and pathway forward. The plan provides a pathway to end Hamas as a regime and terror army in Gaza and to prevent Gaza from threatening Israel going forward. The goal is to disarm Hamas, dismantle its infrastructure, and transform Gaza into a stable, peaceful entity, though it remains a “work in progress.” - Hostages and displaced persons. A central issue is the status of hostages: Hamas holds 13 of the 28 people Hamas allegedly murdered and held, with 18 returned so far, and 25 originally cited in discussions (the transcript mentions 28 total murdered and 18 returned, with 13 still in Hamas control). The speaker argues that Hamas knows the whereabouts of several more hostages and should deliver them; the claim is that some hostages who were said to be unlocated could be found even if debris removal is slow. The Red Cross and humanitarian organizations say recovering bodies will be a massive, decades-long challenge, but the speakers argue that locating hostages does not require full debris removal. Aid and humanitarian access are discussed, including a suspension of aid after the killing of Israeli soldiers that was brief and then reinstated; aid trucks are allowed through to humanitarian zones controlled by Israel in Gaza, with concerns about Hamas siphoning aid for its own purposes. - Aid leakage and Hamas control of aid. The speakers contend that Hamas stole or redirected up to 95% of aid in Gaza prior to the ceasefire, using it to fund its war against Israel. They argue that UN agencies operating in Gaza are often under Hamas influence, whether willingly or unwillingly, and thus aid distribution has been compromised when Hamas governs. - Hamas’ current behavior in Gaza and security concerns. Hamas is described as reasserting control by mass executions and intimidation; there is concern about how much control they exert over the areas they govern and the potential for continued war if they disarm remains unactioned. The discussion stresses that the longer Hamas can control areas, the more they can pursue their war. - Trump–Kushner–Witkoff diplomatic leverage. The discussion credits President Trump’s diplomacy with changing Hamas’s calculus. The Qatar strike that nearly targeted Hamas negotiators is acknowledged as a turning point; Kushner and Witkoff claimed that Hamas wanted peace when engaged directly in Egypt, and that the strike on Qatar frightened Hamas into reconsidering its position. The interlocutor suggests that palace diplomacy, allied pressure in the Arab and Islamic world, and the military pressure on Gaza City converged to push Hamas toward releasing hostages and engaging with the peace process. - Israel’s regional strategy and deterrence. The speaker emphasizes that Israel must be able to defend itself and maintain power in the region. The Abraham Accords are cited as a success, with normalization continuing because partners recognize Israel’s stability and the advantages of cooperation. The Palestinian statehood question is reframed as a broader test of Palestinian willingness to accept Israel’s existence; the speaker notes parliamentary support in Israel opposing a Palestinian state and argues that Palestinian society must change its stance toward recognizing a Jewish state. - Lebanon and Hezbollah. Optimism is tempered by caution. In Lebanon, there is some movement toward demilitarization, with the Lebanese army involved and Hezbollah’s power being re-evaluated. The speaker stresses that even if conflict ends, Israel will remain vigilant and prepared to prevent a rebuilt Hezbollah threat along the border, citing past upheavals and the need to protect border towns like Kiryat Shmona. - Iran and the wider threat. Iran’s missile program and its nuclear ambitions are described as two cancers threatening Israel: missiles capable of delivering heavy payloads and a nuclear program. The strategic aim is to prevent Iran from creating a “ring of fire” around Israel (Syria, Lebanon, Gaza, Yemen, Iraq) and to prevent metastasis of Iran’s influence from spreading. - Global sentiment and demonization. The speaker acknowledges growing global antisemitism and demonization of Israel post-October 7, but argues that Israel’s demonstrated ability to defend itself strengthens its position and that support should endure as the conflict recedes from prominence. The Palestinian leadership’s stance and the broader regional dynamics remain central to whether a two-state solution can emerge, with a tempered expectation that the peace plan will proceed step by step.

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.

USAID, with 10,000 employees and a $40 billion annual budget, has drawn scrutiny for its spending. Investigations revealed funding for electric vehicles in Vietnam, a transgender clinic in India, and $1.5 million to a Serbian LGBTQ group for diversity initiatives. A Middle East Forum study showed $164 million spent on radical organizations globally, including $122 million to groups linked to terrorist organizations. Millions were also directed to Hamas-controlled organizations in Gaza, groups calling for the removal of Jews, and projects in Guatemala for sex changes. Other questionable expenditures include funding for a Sesame Street show in Iraq, combating misinformation in Kazakhstan, and providing meals to a group linked to Al-Qaeda. Additional examples include funding LGBT advocacy in Jamaica and projects in Cuba, Belarus, and Macedonia. These findings raise concerns about how taxpayer money is allocated.

American taxpayer money is funding the Taliban through $40,000,000 sent weekly by the US government to Afghanistan. The money goes through the Afghanistan International Bank to the Taliban-controlled Central Bank, led by a sanctioned terrorist. The Central Bank auctions the dollars to licensed money dealers involved in the hawala system.

We've learned that USAID has been used to push globalist propaganda and potentially fund terrorism, even resulting in American deaths, which could lead to criminal referrals. The agency may need to be abolished. We aim to expose the millions of dollars going to radical organizations, some with ties to terrorists. There are questions about why mechanisms to prevent foreign aid from reaching terrorist groups aren't working, especially when we see terrorist weaponry linked to these funds. For years, USAID has been a slush fund for left-wing propaganda. We need to ensure American tax dollars benefit American citizens and interests, not wasted on things like DEI musicals abroad. This may be the world's largest money laundering scheme in history. We're committed to creating transparency across the government, thanks to President Trump and Elon Musk, who will help expose every corner of government. That is what the American people want.

International NGOs and UN agencies allegedly lobby in Washington D.C. against vetting policies that would prevent funding terrorists. USAID effectively self-funds its own external private lobby that asks Congress for more money for USAID. These lobbyists bring together groups that work with groups that kill Americans. USAID programs have not been aligned with U.S. national security interests and have helped China. USAID pushes much of the world towards China on the green energy agenda and causes resentment through social reengineering. Lobbyists have tried to kill legislation like H.R. 160, which was meant to increase transparency in USAID's funding of overseas organizations and give U.S. lawmakers the ability to have higher transparency in terror financing investigations aimed at scrutinizing extremist groups. A regulation requiring names of those handling money in areas with terrorists to be checked against terrorist databases was allegedly overturned by Biden.

We spent $9 billion to resettle around 90,000 Afghan refugees since the fall of Afghanistan, averaging about $100,000 per person, which seems excessive. My question is, why are we providing any funds when we don't even have an embassy or diplomats in Afghanistan? The funds we provide come through partners like UN agencies and NGOs. We could apply that reasoning to all foreign aid, including funds going to foreign adversaries.

There are concerns about possible violence outside an embassy, reminiscent of past incidents like Benghazi and Tehran in 1979. Additionally, there are reports that over $1 billion of US taxpayer money may have been used to support Hamas under President Biden. A report suggests that the United Nations Relief and Work Agency received this funding, which was cut off by former President Trump due to its links to Hamas. Senator Marsha Blackburn plans to introduce legislation to halt funding until Iran is expelled from the UN and investigated for violations. The State Department denies these claims, stating that the UNRWA has measures in place to prevent funds from benefiting terrorists. However, evidence suggests that Hamas weapons were found at relief group schools, and teachers employed by the aid group in Gaza and the West Bank promoted hatred and terrorism. The Biden administration is seeking an additional $260 million for this group.

International NGOs and UN agencies allegedly lobby in Washington D.C. against vetting policies that would prevent foreign aid from reaching terrorists. USAID effectively self-funds its own external private lobby that asks Congress for more money for USAID. This lobby brings together groups that work with groups that kill Americans. USAID programs have not been aligned with U.S. national security interests and have helped China. USAID pushes much of the world towards China on the green energy agenda and causes resentment through social reengineering. Lobbyists have tried to kill legislation like H.R. 160, which was meant to increase transparency in USAID's funding of overseas organizations and give US Lawmakers the ability to have higher transparency in terror financing investigations aimed at scrutinizing extremist groups. A regulation requiring names of those handling money in terrorist areas to be checked against terrorist databases was overturned by Biden.

The speaker claims that $697,000,000 of U.S. money annually funds Madrasas, ISIS, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, ISIS Khorazan, and terrorist training camps. They allege that programs like the Women's Scholarship Endowment ($60,000,000 annually) and Young Women Lead ($5,000,000 annually) are not benefiting Afghan women, because the Taliban does not allow women to speak in public. The speaker states that USAID spent $8,840,000,000 in the last twenty years on Pakistan's education programs, including $136,000,000 to build 120 schools, but there is zero evidence that any were built. They add that USAID spent $20,000,000 to create educational television programs for children unable to attend these nonexistent schools. The speaker concludes that U.S. money is funding terrorism and demands that it end.

I recently attended a meeting in an expensive Alpine town, overwhelmingly populated by wealthy Ukrainians spending lavishly. This is a pattern across Europe; the richest people are Ukrainian. This money, I believe, should belong to American taxpayers. Furthermore, I know that a significant portion, possibly half, of the arms we send to Ukraine are being sold, some ending up with drug cartels on our border. Our intelligence agencies are aware of this. The media reports Zelensky's denials, but the New York Times could easily order Ukrainian weapons online—this is a fact. The official death toll is likely a lie; the entire situation is a deception. Sending billions in aid without tracking its use is irresponsible, and the possibility of these weapons being used against us is terrifying. This situation mirrors the issues we faced with the Mujahideen in the 80s. The lack of transparency and accountability is appalling.