reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Speaker 0 expresses frustration with a life of endless work for low pay, returning home to drown troubles, and a sense of disappointment with the world. He laments living in the new world with an old soul, wishes politicians would look out for minors, and criticizes blackmail and the way money is obtained. Speaker 1 discusses a claim: she states to the justice department that she was part of the beginning process of the Clinton Global Initiative and believes Jeffrey Epstein actually funded the Clinton Global Initiative, with them developing the idea together on a trip to Davos. He notes this aligns with the start of the Clinton Foundation in 2002, when Epstein was personally flying President Clinton around Africa as an aerial chauffeur on multiple trips. He asserts that this period marked Epstein’s proximity to power as Clinton Foundation preparations were underway. He argues that the Clinton Foundation engaged in pay-to-play while Hillary Clinton rose in New York Senate politics and later became secretary of state, enabling foreign policy to be influenced by donors and major corporations. The claim is that U.S. foreign policy was effectively shaped by the state department, defense, CIA, and USAID to benefit those who funded the Clintons, in contrast to national interest. He presents Epstein as a money bundler, a deal maker, and part of the origins of the Clinton Foundation’s influence machine. He adds that the Justice Department shut down three FBI investigations into the Clinton Foundation and the IRS investigation as well, with the IRS claiming lack of resources to pursue the case, implying political cronyism and large-scale fraud that allegedly could not be prosecuted. Speaker 2 recounts a first-person experience at Wexner’s residence. He mentions having a driver’s license and being given Jeffrey Epstein’s SUV, but notes there were sharpshooters around. He describes a basement area that wasn’t on the lower floor, featuring a huge sauna, a vault, and an underground tunnel. The tunnel’s existence was confirmed by their maid, who explained that the door led to the main house, revealing the tunnel connecting underground passages. Overall, the transcript juxtaposes personal disillusionment with systemic allegations about the Clinton Foundation and Epstein’s role in its origins, alongside a vivid, confessional account of a private residence with security measures and secret tunnels.

In an early 2014 email, Hillary Clinton informed her campaign manager that ISIS is funded by the governments of Saudi Arabia and Qatar. This revelation is significant as it contradicts the notion that only rogue princes were supporting ISIS. The Clinton Foundation received donations from Saudi Arabia and Qatar while Clinton was Secretary of State, coinciding with massive arms sales to these countries. The arms deal with Saudi Arabia exceeded $80 billion, contributing to a doubling of total US arms exports during Clinton's tenure. This connection raises concerns about ISIS being funded by those who donated to the Clinton Foundation.

The transcript traces a tapestry of questions around Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, and the Clinton Foundation, emphasizing perceived links between philanthropic or diplomatic activity and private gain, while laying out specific Haiti and international case studies that critics say illustrate a pattern of influence peddling and blurred lines between public power and private wealth. Haiti after the 2010 earthquake: - After the January 12, 2010 earthquake, Hillary Clinton, as secretary of state, and Bill Clinton, as UN special envoy for Haiti, led relief and recovery efforts. The Interim Haiti Recovery Commission (IHRC) was created to coordinate relief and reconstruction, with Haitian Prime Minister John Max Bellarive and Bill Clinton named as co-chairs. - The IHRC aimed to go beyond relief to long-term improvement, but concerns emerged that decisions were being made by Clinton and Bellarive with insufficient Haitian input. Members of the IHRC later wrote a letter complaining they were not involved and that national priorities were being disregarded. - Projects associated with US funding and Clintons’ involvement included: the Haitian mobile money initiative; plans to exploit mineral wealth; two gold exploitation permits issued after a fifty-year gap; and the Karakol Industrial Park (Caracol) intended to create tens of thousands of jobs. - The Caracol opening drew high-profile attendance (Bill and Hillary Clinton, Donna Karan, Ben Stiller, Sean Penn). However, questions arose about value and transparency: only about 5,000 of the promised 65,000 jobs materialized; the area displaced farmers; local workers reported low wages (roughly 225 gourds/day, about $5 USD); and only a portion of promised infrastructure and housing funding was realized. - Digicel, run by Irish billionaire Dennis O’Brien, profited substantially in Haiti’s telecom sector, and later contributed to the Clinton Foundation; Digicel was a key beneficiary in mobile money initiatives tied to post-disaster relief. - Tony Rodham, Hillary Clinton’s brother, joined the board of VCS Mining, which received a gold exploitation permit in Haiti, prompting scrutiny about potential family influence in contracting decisions. - The strongest economic gains were tied to US-linked firms such as Gap, Target, and Walmart through Caracol’s textile emphasis, while other projects did not deliver promised outcomes. - After the campaign for president, Hillary Clinton announced she would quit the Clinton Foundation to devote herself to full-time candidacy, and the foundation adjusted donation policies to restrict foreign government contributions, though concerns persisted about ongoing influence and access resulting from prior relationships. Global money, influence, and the Clinton Foundation: - The Clinton Foundation, founded in 2001 (initially as the William J. Clinton Presidential Foundation), positioned itself as a hub at the nexus of global money, influence, and power, with a stated mission to tackle hunger, poverty, climate change, and disease by marshaling government and private resources. - The Foundation reportedly raised more than a billion dollars over the years, with substantial speaking fees and book deals contributing to the Clintons’ wealth, especially after Bill Clinton left the presidency. - Critics argue that large donors could gain access to or influence through the Clintons’ public roles, while supporters emphasize the Foundation’s global humanitarian work. A memorandum of understanding during the Obama transition sought accountability: disclosures of new contributions to the Foundation, prior approval for foreign government donations, and state department vetting of Bill Clinton’s speeches and consulting arrangements. Selected foreign cases cited by Peter Schweitzer in Clinton Cash: - United Arab Emirates (UAE): In 2011, while UAE officials pressed Hillary Clinton on Iran sanctions, Bill Clinton was paid half a million dollars for a speech in Abu Dhabi by the crown prince’s brother; UAE later provided donations to charitable groups associated with Clinton-linked initiatives. - Ericsson (Sweden): In 2009-2010, Ericsson paid Bill Clinton $750,000 for a speech amid ongoing Iran sanctions discussions, framed by the foundation’s influence and Clinton’s crowd-pulling. - Colombia: In 2010, Bill Clinton met with President Uribe and, contemporaneously, Hillary Clinton discussed free trade agreements with Uribe; Frank Giustra, a Clinton Foundation donor, accompanied Bill Clinton and later secured government concessions in Colombia for Giustra’s companies. - Ethiopia and Saudi Arabia: Sheikh Al Amoudi pledged $20 million to the Clinton Foundation; Ethiopian rights concerns were raised regarding the donor’s government ties, and Hillary Clinton granted a waiver allowing continued US assistance despite human rights concerns. - Kazakhstan and Uranium One: Bill Clinton hosted a meeting with Kazakh officials in which Giustra had significant mining interests; Uranium One eventually came under Russian ownership, controlled by Vladimir Putin, with the deal requiring federal approval from Hillary Clinton as secretary of state; Canadian investor Ian Telfer contributed to the Clinton Foundation but reportedly did not disclose some donations. The report concludes with ongoing debates about the Clinton “blur”—the intertwining of philanthropy, political power, and corporate influence—while noting that Hillary Clinton’s campaign faced persistent questions about trust and influence, including opposition to certain foreign deals and ongoing scrutiny of donations and relationships involving the Clinton Foundation and related business interests.

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.

Speaker 0: An early 2014 email from Hillary Clinton to her campaign manager, John Podesta, states that ISIL ISIS is funded by the governments of Saudi Arabia and Qatar. This email is described as the most significant in the collection. Speaker 1: The discussion notes that Saudi and Qatari money is spread widely, including to many media institutions. While some analysts and even the US government have mentioned that some Saudi figures have supported or funded ISIS, the typical explanation has been that it’s rogue princes using oil money with the government disapproving. The email, however, asserts that the governments of Saudi Arabia and Qatar have been funding ISIS. Speaker 1: It is claimed that Saudis, Qataris, Moroccans, Bahrainis—particularly the Saudis and the Qataris—are giving money to the Clinton Foundation while Hillary Clinton is secretary of state, and the State Department is approving massive arms sales to Saudi Arabia. Speaker 0: Hillary Clinton says, “I’m Hillary Clinton,” and emails reveal a significant discussion about it. The email asserts that the largest ever arms deal in the world was made with Saudi Arabia, more than $80,000,000,000. It states that during her tenure as secretary of state, total arms exports from the United States in terms of the dollar value doubled. Speaker 1: The consequence noted is that the notorious terrorist jihadist group ISIL or ISIS is created largely with money from the very people who are giving money to the Clinton Foundation. The implication highlighted is that this is extraordinary.

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.

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.

In an email from Hillary Clinton to her campaign manager, it is stated that Saudi Arabia and Qatar, the governments themselves, have been funding ISIS. This is significant because Saudi and Qatari money is spread across various media institutions. While Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State, the Saudis and Qataris were giving money to the Clinton Foundation, while the State Department approved massive arms sales, particularly to Saudi Arabia. The largest arms deal in the world, worth over $80 billion, was made with Saudi Arabia during Clinton's tenure. As a result, the terrorist group ISIS was largely funded by the same people who donated to the Clinton Foundation.

During Hillary Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State, she allegedly directed $3.1 billion to Haiti. Her brother, Tony Rodham, who sat on the board of a mining company, obtained one of only two gold exploitation permits issued by the government in over 50 years. The permit granted them a mining rate of 2.5%, which is half the standard rate, causing dissatisfaction among the Haitian Congress. For more details, please check the link provided in the comment section.

The Clinton Foundation received $26 million from a Swedish fundraising arm while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state and not blacklisting Swedish companies for breaking sanctions against Iran. This, along with other evidence, suggests a quid pro quo. Bill Clinton also received his largest speech payment of $750,000 from Ericsson, a Swedish company involved in the Iran debate. Shortly after, the State Department, led by Hillary Clinton, announced they would not impose sanctions on companies like Ericsson, allowing them to self-regulate. This pattern of behavior, where the Clintons receive financial benefits while making favorable decisions, is seen repeatedly. The public's concern about corruption and self-enrichment by politicians is reflected in Hillary's declining poll numbers.

As a senator, I'm concerned about USAID's lack of transparency with taxpayer dollars. Examples include funding for a Wuhan lab, Iraqi Sesame Street, and fashion weeks in Europe. My TRACS Act aims to disclose every grant recipient to prevent funds from going to adversaries. The fact that the US government funded the creation of the virus that caused the global pandemic is incredible. It is terrible for people to believe charitable support is tied to political manipulation, so we need a firewall between genuine aid and CIA/State Department activities. It is an all American commitment to not letting the state be abused for political reasons. The focus should be on transparency, accountability, and clarity in our interactions with the world. We need to identify the waste, fraud within our federal government, and get those reforms over the finish line.

I rise in support of my amendment to prevent taxpayer funds from being used for state department employees to attend events hosted by the Clinton Global Initiative. The organization has been involved in corruption and influence peddling, such as the Moroccan government funding a conference through a state-owned enterprise. This deal condoned Morocco's sovereignty over disputed land. The Clinton Global Initiative has faced numerous scandals, including undisclosed donations linked to the sale of US uranium production to a Russian agency. Although it shut down after the 2016 campaign, it has recently reconstituted itself and promotes radical elitist woke schemes. We need to send a clear message to end coordination with the US government, conferences with corrupt governments, and the organization's influence on US policy making.

We had a productive discussion about USAID, an issue I've focused on for years in the Senate. USAID has consistently obstructed my congressional oversight efforts. I shared examples of waste within the organization during a recent conversation on X Spaces with Elon. It's crucial that we scrutinize every dollar spent there, and I'm pleased to see a shift in oversight to the State Department.

The speaker states the Clinton Foundation acted as an agent of a foreign government, giving the example of Mozambique in 2002. According to the speaker, a memorandum of agreement existed between the foundation and Mozambique to work on their behalf through their Ministry of Health program. Emails suggest this was not a Clinton Foundation program, but rather support for the Mozambique Ministry of Health. The speaker claims the foundation brokered money and pharmaceuticals, taking a vague fee. They negotiated relationships with pharmaceutical companies. The speaker concludes the Clinton Foundation functioned as a closely held family partnership, not a charity.

Taxpayer money is sent to government organizations, then to NGOs. If it's a government-funded NGO, it's effectively just the government. A fraud loophole exists because the government can send money to an NGO that is no longer governed by U.S. laws. The money is sent overseas to one NGO, then through others. The speaker is highly confident that some of that money returns to the U.S. and enriches certain people. There are strangely wealthy members of Congress, and it's unclear how they accumulated millions while earning comparatively little. The speaker aims to investigate this and prevent it from continuing.

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.

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?

In 2010, the Clinton Foundation received $1 billion for Haiti after the earthquake, but less than 2% actually reached Haiti. The Haitian community wants Trump to ask Hillary Clinton to reveal where the money went during the next debate.

Congressional investigators are being asked if Hillary Clinton gave 20% of the US uranium supply to Russia in exchange for donations to the Clinton Foundation. The question stems from the 2010 sale of Uranium One, a company controlling a fifth of US uranium, to Rosatom, a Russian firm. The US part of the deal had to be approved by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the US, comprised of nine agencies, including the State Department, where Hillary Clinton was the boss at the time. The Hill newspaper reported that the FBI was investigating a Rosatom subsidiary for racketeering, money laundering, and bribes aimed at giving Russia more influence over the US nuclear industry while the deal was being approved. Some members of Congress want to know why they weren't told about this. The Hill also reports that the Russians were channeling millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation at the same time. Republicans are questioning if Hillary Clinton helped this deal along.

In an email from Hillary Clinton to her campaign manager, it is stated that the governments of Saudi Arabia and Qatar have been funding ISIS. This is significant because Saudi and Qatari money is spread across various media institutions. It has been known that some Saudi figures support ISIS, but the government has always claimed disapproval, blaming rogue individuals. However, this email confirms that it is the governments themselves funding ISIS. Additionally, during Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State, the US approved a massive arms deal with Saudi Arabia worth over $80 billion, and the Clinton Foundation received donations from Saudi Arabia and Qatar, who were also funding ISIS. This connection is alarming.

I'm proposing to reduce Samantha Power's salary to $1. As USAID administrator, Power is a globalist activist pushing regime views. She prioritized diversity, marginalized voices, and responsive aid. USAID now focuses on food security, climate change, and DEI, even installing DEI advisors and scorecards, demanding ideological conformity. Power has met repeatedly with left-wing foundations like Soros' Open Society and the Gates Foundation, exemplifying the Biden administration's close ties to groups executing extreme policies. As UN ambassador, she requested unmasking names linked to the 2016 Trump campaign. Rewarded with a permanent seat on the National Security Council, Power abuses her position to impose a left-wing agenda. This amendment holds her accountable.

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 salaries of only around $200,000 per year. The speaker says they are going to try to figure it out and stop it from happening.

I looked into Norm Eisen's NGO, State United Democracies Center, which includes prominent figures like Janet Napolitano and Michael Steele. The organization received $17 million in private donations. After researching, the only thing I could find that they did with the money was produce a low-quality Muppet show. The videos had very few views. I question what happened to the $17 million, considering the poor quality and lack of promotion of the Muppet show.

In 2010, after the Haiti earthquake, the Clinton Foundation received billions in donations from American taxpayers and the world. However, less than 2% of that money actually went to Haiti. We are asking Mr. Trump to publicly request Hillary Clinton to disclose a full audit of all the funds they allegedly stole from Haiti after the earthquake. Haiti is a poor country in desperate need of defenders. We welcome your support and are ready to collaborate with you. Please, during your next debate with Hillary Clinton, ask her to publish the audit of all the money that was taken from Haiti. Thank you.

Bill Gates donated $5 billion to his own foundation and received a tax write-off for it. This raises questions about the corruption within the government.