reSee.it - Related Video Feed

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 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.

Elon Musk did not create USAID, and he cannot destroy it. We will stop him. Musk may have gained control over financial systems, but he does not control the American people's money. His actions threaten lives globally, impacting crucial programs like HIV and AIDS prevention and anti-malarial education. Regardless of Musk's intentions, they do not align with the laws established by Congress. We will defend USAID. Reports indicate that evaluations have been removed from the USAID website, jeopardizing major foreign aid programs totaling less than $40 billion, while the Pentagon budget is nearly $900 billion. Musk, who became wealthy from public funds, is attempting to undermine USAID, but we will not allow this to happen.

USAID, under Samantha Power, is accused of promoting a radical ideology that is anti-family and anti-life onto the developing world, essentially ideological colonization. The agency has been weaponized to attack conservative parties, not only in Brazil, but also in pro-America countries like Poland and Hungary. In Syria, USAID allegedly funneled over $15 billion to topple Bashar al-Assad, funding opposition groups and anti-government networks under the guise of humanitarian aid. During the Euro Maiden Uprising in Ukraine in 2014, USAID spent billions on civil society initiatives to destabilize the pro-Russian government, funding NGOs and media outlets to amplify anti-Yanukovych sentiment. When USAID acts in American national security interests, it is correct. However, it becomes detrimental when abused for political purposes and sponsoring anti-American ideologies. Pro-American propaganda is acceptable, but funding regimes that oppose American values should be avoided.

I'm concerned about the scrutiny USAID is facing. It's an organization that promotes national security, human rights, and global health. But, some USAID projects are questionable uses of taxpayer money. For example, millions of dollars have gone to tourism in Egypt, a Democratic Party propaganda arm, transgender opera in Colombia, sex changes in Guatemala, bat research in Wuhan, and even a new Sesame Street show in Iraq. These expenditures raise serious questions about how taxpayer money is being spent. We need to take a closer look at these allocations.

USAID cuts have been harming third world nations that never bothered to develop their own economies while they were on the dole. Hodan Oseman, President of the Somali Development and Reconstruction Bank, says that those cuts have had a severe impact on her country's economy, Somalia. They've been receiving development aid this is separate from humanitarian aid for at least forty three years from US taxpayers, and we have been the single largest donors to aid in that nation. By the way, forty three years? That's longer than my children receive development money from me. I think it's time for the little boys to act like grown ups now, and I'm sure that after nearly half a century of US funded economic development, they actually have a developed economy. Wouldn't you think?

USAID has been unresponsive and misaligned with U.S. foreign policy, despite its role in spending taxpayer dollars. Historically, it has operated independently, ignoring directives from the State Department and failing to provide transparency about its programs and funding. This lack of cooperation has hindered effective oversight and alignment with national interests. The goal is to ensure that every dollar spent abroad supports U.S. interests, rather than acting as a global charity. Reform efforts have been ongoing for decades, but USAID has resisted change. Moving forward, it is essential that taxpayer money is used to further U.S. national interests, and this lack of accountability will no longer be tolerated.

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.

USAID is far worse than people realize. Remember the outrage over Elon Musk buying Twitter? We should have that same energy about the $200 billion supposedly sent to Ukraine—Zelensky says only half arrived. That's $100 billion unaccounted for! Meanwhile, crucial needs like fixing Flint's water crisis ($1.5 billion) are ignored, while Ethiopia receives more annually. The system is corrupt; politicians benefit through USAID, creating a loop of self-enrichment. The media, also funded by USAID, manipulates public opinion, making us think we're wrong to question it. This isn't normal; our outrage is manufactured. We need to investigate this waste and corruption. If you're a business owner struggling to reach your potential, let's fix your processes and boost your profits.

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.

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.

A $100,000 donation intended to buy food for poor kids in Africa doesn't fully reach them because the NGO subcontracts the work, creating multiple middlemen. Marco Rubio, the Secretary of State, estimates that 88¢ of every dollar goes to middlemen. Only 12¢ of each dollar spent on humanitarian assistance reaches the people who need it. There is a lot of waste.

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.

President Trump's policies, including potential defunding of USAID, significantly impact Africa and Nigeria. Prior to the policy change, Nigeria received substantial USAID funding for healthcare, education, and civil society initiatives. However, concerns have been raised that USAID funding is used for unconventional warfare, destabilizing targeted countries. The withdrawal of funding threatens job losses and jeopardizes ongoing grants. Critics argue that USAID's interventions don't address root causes of conflict and that aid dependency hinders self-sufficiency. Nigeria should prioritize internal solutions, focusing on local capacity building and reducing reliance on foreign aid to achieve sustainable development. This requires unlocking domestic productivity and developing locally relevant policies and programs.

Initially, USAID was created with good intentions. However, the agency has broken the trust with the American people and hasn't been transparent about where our taxpayer dollars are going. In 2021, the special operations command put out an instruction manual with instructions and examples on how the military could work with the state department, intel services, and USAID using race riots in order to destabilize nations. They also advocated for setting up job fairs near some of these riots so that disaffected workers could gain employment. These operations are taking place without government oversight, without the authority of the president, without the authority of congress. USAID needs to condemn this and provide oversight to congress on exactly where our tax dollars are going. Do you agree that this is wrong?

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.

Donald Trump has involved Elon Musk in an initiative to eliminate wasteful spending within government agencies like USAID. There is resistance within these agencies to outside influence, reflecting a belief that they operate independently of elected officials. USAID's projects often serve dual purposes, advancing U.S. foreign policy while presenting a humanitarian facade. Historical scandals, including the CIA's misuse of public health initiatives for intelligence, raise concerns about USAID's operations. The potential for classified information at USAID to jeopardize national security is alarming, especially given its ties to the CIA. If foreign nations discover the extent of USAID's actions, it could damage U.S. diplomatic relations and trust, pushing countries toward adversaries like Russia and China, ultimately harming U.S. economic interests and global standing.

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 and other NGOs are not rescuing Africa, but are wolves in sheep's clothing, supporting those who keep governments in turmoil. American taxpayers should know that only a fraction of the billions of dollars given to USAID reaches the people. An HIV AIDS program in South Africa allegedly injected people with the virus, contributing to its rapid spread in Southern Africa. Africans were used as guinea pigs for experimental activities. GMOs are destroying African agriculture. While some good may come out of these programs, the end result is that they mean no good.

I Googled USAID and apparently Trump and Elon shut off the world's oxygen supply. But what's missing from these stories is any reporting on what USAID was spending money on, like sketchy projects they funneled billions into, or why shutting it down might be a good thing. USAID was dropping millions on gender studies in countries that still stone women, funding infrastructure projects where nothing ever got built, and paying for DC cocktail parties instead of actual aid. The media is acting like USAID was a holy temple when in reality, it was just a government ATM with no withdrawal limits. Nobody even knew what USAID did until Trump shut it down. If your charity dies when the free government money stops flowing, it wasn't a charity. It was a money laundering Ponzi scheme. And the fact that CNN is crying tells you everything.

We have relied on USAID for over 60 years, and now, with a 90-day pause for auditing, the country is in turmoil. This should prompt reflection for Uganda and Africa. Foreign aid often suffers from corruption and mismanagement, leading to unaccounted billions. It's reasonable for donors to request audits, even if it affects funding for crucial healthcare projects. This pause highlights our dependency on aid, which can be withdrawn at any time. Uganda and African nations must focus on building sustainable systems rather than relying on foreign assistance. We need to recognize our situation and strive for independence, as the current reliance on aid is not a viable long-term solution. Uganda must take action.

Mister Birchitt (the chair) and Congressman discussions about US foreign aid and terrorism. - Congressman asks Roman if the US is sending $40,000,000 a week to the Taliban. Roman confirms. - He asks for other instances of foreign aid going to terrorist organizations. Birchitt/ Roman responds: US assistance has gone to Al Shabaab in Somalia; the Hamzee network in Sudan; Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, Kabaiba Hezbollah; Hayat Tahrir al Sham’s in Syria. Dozens of terror organizations have received indirect US aid. - The Congressman requests elaboration on mechanisms to stop aid to terrorists and why they aren’t working. Birchitt/Roman describe Gaza as a case study: $2.1 billion in American taxpayers’ money to Gaza since October 7. USAID provided emergency use funds to parties USAID previously had relationships with in the Gaza Strip, vetted by OFAC and special designated terrorists lists; waivers granted due to emergency, bypassing usual screening. As a result, 90% of US aid via Gaza ended up in Hamas-controlled areas. The aid underwrote Hamas’s ability to survive until the ceasefire. No strategic thought behind it; no screening. - The Congressman asks if the emergency might have armed terrorists to kill civilians. Birchitt agrees. He adds: Samantha Power, administrator for USAID, was intent on Israel not being able to defend itself. - The Congressman mispronounces Primarack (Birchitt jokingly comments). They discuss how terrorists exploited foreign aid loopholes. - Witnesses discuss how international NGOs and UN agencies lobby Washington against vetting policies. A former senior vetting officer at USAID describes that the UN and others lobby against stricter vetting; InterAction, the largest NGO lobby, is mentioned as having a former employee on the panel. USAID effectively self-funds its own external private lobby that then goes back to Congress asking for more money for USAID. The implication is that taxpayers fund this lobby against American interests, potentially harming allies and Americans. - They claim USAID programs have not been aligned with U.S. national security interests and have actually helped China. The programs are said to push the world toward China on the green energy agenda, and to push ordinary people toward China due to perceived social reengineering. - They note that many countries benefit from funding without needing lobbying, such as South Africa. Lobbyists have pressured to kill HR 160, a bill from the last session intended to increase transparency in USAID funding of overseas organizations and to enable terror-financing investigations. - They reference a regulation from the prior administration requiring terrorist financing screening databases for entities handling money in terrorist-prone areas; that regulation was overturned by Biden. - The Chairwoman notes having only five seconds left as the exchange ends with a brief mention of concluding remarks.

USAID has been unresponsive and often operates independently of U.S. foreign policy, which is concerning given that it uses taxpayer dollars. There is a need for alignment between USAID's programs and the national interest, as outlined by the State Department and the National Security Council. Despite attempts to reform the agency over the past few decades, it continues to resist cooperation and transparency regarding funding and program details. This lack of accountability cannot persist, and it is essential that taxpayer money is used to support U.S. national interests. The ongoing frustration with USAID's operations has spanned multiple administrations and must be addressed.

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.

We're spending massive amounts of money in other countries on things nobody's ever heard of. $520 million for environmental, social, and governance investments in Africa. $25 million to promote biodiversity in Colombia. $42 million for Johns Hopkins to research social change in Uganda. $10 million for circumcisions in Mozambique. $9.7 million to UC Berkeley for enterprise skills in Cambodia. $32 million to the Prague Civil Society Center, and $14 million for public procurement in Serbia. We're giving $21 million for voter turnout in India, while Nepal gets $20 million for fiscal federalism. Millions more are going to biodiversity in Nepal, voter confidence in Liberia, social cohesion in Mali, and learning outcomes in Asia. It's fraud, and I could go on all day.