reSee.it - Related Video Feed

USAID is allegedly influencing judicial systems globally, aiming for "pacification" and "stability." The speaker claims that in Poland, USAID and corrupted prosecutors are working to eliminate populism after the previous democratically elected leader was ousted. A Google search for "USAID" and "judicial reform" reveals numerous countries where the U.S. is supposedly influencing judiciaries, including Serbia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Uzbekistan, Albania, El Salvador, Ukraine, Central America, and Georgia. This is described as standard practice, a "USAID Truman Show" that has been refined for sixty years. The speaker predicts that these networks will seek funding from various international allies, including European entities, China, and South American governments, and will pressure organizations like the UN, NATO, and the EU to weaponize their assets.

USAID has faced criticism for its funding practices and alleged connections to harmful activities globally. Many believe it has contributed to destabilizing countries, such as funding opposition in Venezuela and influencing conflicts in Ukraine and Syria. Critics argue that USAID operates under the guise of humanitarian aid while serving the interests of a military-industrial complex, distorting local economies and priorities. The organization has been linked to controversial figures and actions, including the training of journalists against democratically elected governments. Despite some individuals within USAID having good intentions, the overall impact of its operations is viewed as detrimental, with calls for a reevaluation of its funding and activities.

USAID is allegedly influencing judicial systems globally, aiming for "pacification" and "stability." The speaker claims that in Poland, USAID and corrupted prosecutors are working to eliminate populism after the transitional justice that occurred when Biden took power. A Google search for "USAID" and "judicial reform" reveals numerous countries where the U.S. is supposedly influencing the judiciary, including Serbia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Uzbekistan, Albania, El Salvador, Ukraine, Central America, and Georgia. This is described as standard practice, a "USAID Truman Show" that has been refined for 60 years. The speaker predicts that these networks will seek funding from various international allies, including European entities, China, and South American governments, to compensate for potential losses from USAID. They will also pressure international organizations like the UN, NATO, and the EU to weaponize their assets.

USAID and similar NGOs, such as DFID, operate in Africa under the guise of humanitarian aid and grassroots initiatives, but their real purpose is to destabilize governments. Many leaders in Africa and the developing world are celebrating USAID's exit. Despite claims of filling gaps in healthcare and education, there is no evidence of improvement in countries where USAID has been present. The social services provided are insignificant, and only a fraction of the billions of dollars given to USAID reaches the people.

The Obama administration, and even the early Trump administration, used taxpayer money to support the socialist government in Albania. This involved partnering with George Soros on projects aimed at weakening the independence of the Albanian judiciary. This wasn't isolated to Albania; similar activities occurred in Romania, Hungary, Guatemala, and Colombia. Soros, a billionaire, doesn't need this funding, yet the State Department and USAID enabled his influence, allowing him to shape foreign policy and even review funding applications. This taxpayer funding, the speaker argues, indirectly subsidizes Soros’s activities, both domestically and internationally, and is a way for the State Department to oppose conservative agendas. The speaker highlights this as an example of the government funding groups that oppose American interests, while right-leaning organizations are largely ignored. Legal action was necessary to obtain the documents revealing these activities.

USAID is allegedly influencing judicial systems globally, aiming for "pacification" and "stability." In Poland, there are claims that USAID and corrupted prosecutors are working to suppress populism by targeting political opponents. A Google search for "USAID" and "judicial reform" reveals numerous countries where the organization is purportedly involved in influencing judiciaries, including Serbia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Uzbekistan, Albania, El Salvador, Ukraine, Central America, and Georgia. This influence extends to judges, courts, legal systems, and prosecutors. The speaker suggests this has been a standard practice for 60 years and will take 50 years to untangle, facing political resistance. These networks may seek funding from other sources, such as the EU or allies in China, and pressure international organizations like the UN, NATO, and the EU to weaponize their assets.

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.

USAID and similar NGOs claim to rescue Africa through grassroots initiatives, but they are wolves in sheep's clothing using humanitarian access to destabilize governments. Most leaders in the developing world are celebrating USAID's exit. USAID claims to fill gaps in healthcare and education, but there's no evidence of improvement in any country where they've operated. The social services they provide are insignificant. American taxpayers should know that only a fraction of the billions of dollars given to USAID reaches the people.

The discussion centers on Samantha Power’s background and her role as U.S. diplomat and former administrator of USAID, described as a “soft power” instrument. The conversation references an interview with Power and claims that USAID was “functionally shut down” and that “14 million lives will be lost,” while also asserting—using claims about “real-world data” and “UNAIDS SAMRC data”—that mortality declined, there were “zero excess deaths,” and “100,000 fewer new HIV infections in 2025 versus 2024.” They argue that if AIDS outcomes improved after USAID cuts, then USAID would not be responsible for deaths caused by AIDS. Speakers discuss specific examples of alleged aid failures and disputed death tolls, including claims about USAID funding and delivery issues in global health interventions, and complaints about “no one audited the programs.” They reference alleged logistics and delivery shortfalls, including a claim that a $10 billion medical supply contract delivered only 7% of supplies, asking where the remaining 93% went. They also cite claims involving Chemonics and describe USAID as failing to deliver fully on diesel fuel and medical supplies needed for transport to remote areas. The transcript repeatedly connects USAID programming to covert influence, regime-change facilitation, and intelligence operations. The conversation claims that USAID and its academic and contractor ecosystem have been involved in “covert regime change” and arms-related activities, including an account that USAID-linked Harvard University partners and fellows were involved in covert plots and arms exports. Speakers frame USAID’s health activities as “soft power fronts,” while arguing that academic modeling and studies are not based on door-to-door verification or real delivery outcomes. A major thread concerns claims about HIV programming being used as cover for covert operations. The transcript alleges that USAID internal documents described an HIV-related Cuba project as “the perfect excuse” for a covert regime change operation, including claims that young travelers posed as tourists, scouted political activists, and created HIV prevention workshops tied to covert political goals. The discussion asks how often similar patterns occurred in multiple conflict regions, repeatedly asserting that USAID ran comparable “perfect excuse” HIV clinics during active civil wars, and demands a categorical denial that such a thing occurred anywhere beyond the example. Speakers also discuss alleged contradictions in messaging about “gendered violence” and “misinformation,” focusing on how categories are framed and whether threats are treated as violence. They argue about whether online threats constitute violence and whether separate labeling implies recognition of different kinds of harm. The conversation discusses childhood and health impacts, including a claim that projections anticipate increased child deaths after USAID dismantlement, and references an assertion that 2025 was the first year in decades with increased child mortality under five, framing this as part of the “destruction of USAID” story. Another theme is the relationship between health funding and infectious disease preparedness. Speakers bring up Ebola and argue about whether USAID is relevant to preparedness and whether its dismantlement reduced response capability. They also focus on COVID-19, asserting that USAID funded the Wuhan Institute of Virology with “tens of millions of dollars,” describing this as relevant to COVID origins and asserting that there is censoring or “censorship shops” hiring efforts to suppress claims about COVID origins. A separate thread addresses energy, electricity access, and electrification policy. The transcript claims USAID “through its Power Africa” involved forcing high-cost energy and restricting cheap carbon-based fuels, and it references a claim that USAID connected “about 150 million people to electricity,” adding that much of it would not have connected to the grid in their lifetime. The discussion also covers a debate about “hard power” versus “soft power,” with claims that terminating USAID removed “life-saving programs” and “life betterment programs” abruptly, and that this undermined America’s trust. It also discusses the idea that USAID’s work could be replicated through other U.S. agencies, with claims that health programs could be handled by HHS instead. The transcript concludes with questions about Iran nuclear negotiations and how different administrations’ “maximum pressure” strategies relate to policy outcomes. It then shifts into a separate, longer segment addressing behavioral economics and information control. Speakers claim Cass Sunstein—described as Samantha Power’s husband and a Harvard professor—authored ideas related to managing conspiracy theories. The transcript argues that Sunstein’s work informs modern information-control strategies and connects these to USAID’s alleged “cognitive infiltration” and “counter disinformation” efforts. The segment ends with social banter and plans for future streaming and personal messages among the participants.

USAID, often seen as a humanitarian organization, has increasingly acted as a tool for domestic control, particularly through its efforts to censor information online. This shift became evident when USAID began targeting American social media platforms to combat disinformation, impacting domestic politics. They have funneled significant funds to organizations that influence U.S. affairs, including those connected to George Soros. USAID's actions reflect a broader agenda against populism, which they view as a threat to democracy. Their funding has supported initiatives that undermine populist movements globally, including in Brazil, where they contributed to censorship efforts against former President Bolsonaro. Ultimately, USAID's role has evolved into a mechanism for enforcing foreign policy goals by stifling domestic dissent.

USAID is perceived as a tool for regime change, with significant funding that surpasses the CIA's budget. Allegations suggest it operates under the guise of humanitarian aid while influencing elections and supporting political agendas in other countries, including Guatemala. There are claims of a connection between US government actions and child trafficking networks, with organizations like Save the Children allegedly involved. Critics argue that the Biden administration has covered up voter fraud in Guatemala, raising concerns about the integrity of US foreign policy. The Department of Homeland Security is accused of creating partnerships with cartels and NGOs, using taxpayer money to facilitate child trafficking. Overall, there are serious accusations of deception and negligence regarding the treatment of vulnerable children in the US.

Hello everyone, and welcome to the weekly report. The USAID website is currently unreachable, as the Trump administration has frozen its activities and may move it under the State Department. This could be one of Trump's most significant actions early in his presidency. Many still view USAID as a disaster relief agency, but it plays a crucial role in U.S. regime change operations, funding NGOs that undermine elected governments. Reports indicate that 90% of Ukrainian media is U.S. government-funded, creating a propaganda loop that distorts the reality of the war. Additionally, USAID allegedly funded research at the Wuhan lab, raising concerns about its role in COVID-19. Americans deserve a transparent audit of USAID, and the agency should be shut down to restore integrity. Thank you for listening.

The Third Precinct has been compromised. USAID used taxpayer money for BLM ($27 million), Soros (at least $260 million), and the WEF ($68 million). Taxpayers allegedly paid for these entities to burn down cities, destroy America, launder money to Democrats, and subsidize the WEF. USAID also funded Middle East Sesame Street ($20 million) and Ukraine ($1 billion). It is claimed that the prosecutor got fired because the money was not received. These actions are described as despicable, appalling, dangerous, and Democrat propaganda via fake news. It is considered an extremely dangerous use of taxpayer funds and a threat to democracy. This is just the tip of the iceberg.

Hello everyone, and welcome to the weekly report. The USAID website is currently inaccessible, and reports indicate the Trump administration has frozen its activities, potentially moving it under the State Department or shutting it down entirely. Many view USAID as a humanitarian agency, but it plays a significant role in U.S. regime change efforts globally, funding NGOs that undermine elected governments. Recent reports show that 90% of Ukrainian media outlets rely on U.S. funding, creating a propaganda loop that distorts information about the conflict. Additionally, USAID is linked to funding gain-of-function research at the Wuhan lab. Americans deserve transparency regarding USAID's actions, and the agency should be audited and ultimately closed. Thank you for listening.

USAID is how the CIA gets things done, attempting regime change with secret accounts and shell companies. They receive $50 billion annually, even funding Al-Shabaab groups and commanding the Taliban to keep opium flowing. USAID, the State Department, and the CIA rigged the Guatemalan election to install CIA-controlled politicians and run a child trafficking network. DHS and HHS created public-private partnerships with Mexican cartels and NGOs like Save the Children to fund international child trafficking. There's a crisis of human smuggling and trafficking where the federal government cannot be turned to for help. We are failing in our American heritage, we have hope in President Trump.

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, 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.

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.

USAID has been a slush fund for left-wing projects globally, including gender surgeries, DEI policies, and climate initiatives. Billions of dollars funded NGOs, which infiltrated corporations and the public sector. This fueled resettlement of illegal immigrants, promoted equity policies, and advanced radical gender agendas. This massive left-wing power structure, including the media, wasn't organic; it was taxpayer-funded. The outcry against President Trump's cuts to USAID funding stems from this. He's cutting off the funding to organizations that harm America.

The US government often touts its aid through USAID, but it primarily serves as a tool for regime change. USAID collaborates with organizations like the National Endowment for Democracy to fund political groups aligned with US interests, supporting propaganda, political organizing, and sometimes violent uprisings. Samantha Power, the current head of USAID, has a history of advocating for US intervention in foreign countries, notably during the Obama administration when she supported the wars in Libya and Syria. These interventions resulted in significant costs and chaos, particularly in Libya, where the aftermath has led to human rights abuses. Much of the aid distributed is likely directed toward groups that align with US economic and political goals, rather than assisting those in genuine need.

USAID has been accused of acting as a covert operations division for U.S. foreign policy, often engaging in activities that resemble those previously conducted by the CIA. This includes funding opposition groups in countries like Bangladesh, where they supported specific demographics to destabilize governments. Both Democrats and internationalist Republicans benefit from USAID, complicating efforts to shut it down. Past presidents, including Biden and Obama, have been implicated in this corruption, with connections to organizations funded by USAID. The Trump administration's foreign policy challenged this system, leading to significant pushback, including legal actions against Trump. USAID's influence extends across various sectors, including media and academia, raising concerns about accountability and transparency in U.S. foreign aid.

USAID is seen as a tool for regime change, funded with $50 billion annually, potentially surpassing the CIA's budget. It operates under the guise of humanitarian aid while allegedly engaging in activities like meddling in elections and supporting oppressive regimes. The Biden administration is accused of covering up voter fraud in Guatemala to install CIA-friendly politicians, facilitating child trafficking networks. There are claims that DHS and HHS are involved in partnerships with cartels and NGOs, using taxpayer money to fund trafficking operations. Secretary Mayorkas faces criticism for policies leading to the smuggling of children, while investigations into trafficking continue.

USAID's actions, particularly its involvement in sustaining Afghanistan's heroin supply, are deeply concerning. The US Institute for Peace, a close USAID partner, advised the Taliban against shutting down poppy fields, citing economic and humanitarian concerns. Simultaneously, USAID provided irrigation to poppy fields, furthering heroin production. This highlights a pattern of using narco-activity as an instrument of statecraft, echoing past practices like supporting Mujahideen with drug money. Countries like El Salvador and Mexico have openly expressed their opposition to USAID's actions, highlighting the organization's negative impact and undermining its legitimacy. To counter this, a moral framework is needed, focusing on honesty and transparency in foreign policy, prioritizing American interests while addressing the underlying issues driving such actions. We need a cohesive foreign policy vision that isn't evil and the ongoing fight to achieve this will require vigilance.

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.