Tag: foreign aid

AP post on USAID cuts backfires as critics question taxpayer-funded Nepal transgender jobs

An Associated Press social media post about transgender aid workers in Nepal turning to sex work after losing their jobs due to U.S. foreign aid cuts sparked a wave of conservative backlash, with critics arguing the video made the case for defunding USAID rather than saving it.

The AP post said that in Nepal, where “a conservative culture leaves openly transgender people with few legal job options,” around 100 LGBTQ aid workers left jobless by U.S. funding cuts had turned to sex work to survive. An accompanying video focused on Rubi Lama, a former HIV outreach worker who said USAID-funded programs had provided free condoms, lubricant and HIV-prevention medication before the cuts.

“When USAID funding was there, condoms were free, lubricant was also distributed … for free,” Lama said in the video, adding that HIV treatments, including PrEP, were also available without cost. “But, now it is gone.”

The framing quickly drew criticism from conservatives who said the story raised the opposite question: why American taxpayers were funding those programs in the first place.

Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, was among the conservatives who argued the AP report made the opposite point from the one intended.

“Our tax dollars no longer fund employment for transgender Nepalese sex workers,” Gill wrote on X. “Thank you for reminding us why defunding USAID was long overdue.”

“Wow very grateful that my tax dollars are no longer funding a bunch of random trannies in Asia,” mocked Daily Wire host Matt Walsh “Is that the point you were trying to make or did you expect us to be somehow sad about this?”

Keep reading

US Suspends Sending Funds to Virgin Islands Housing Authority, Citing Corruption

The U.S. government moved on July 20 to suspend funding for the U.S. Virgin Islands Housing Finance Authority after investigators uncovered what officials called widespread corruption, leaving residents still struggling to rebuild from the twin Category 5 hurricanes that slammed the territory nearly a decade ago.

Housing Secretary Scott Turner announced the suspension, saying an investigation by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) found “widespread financial mismanagement, inadequate fraud controls, false certifications and improper payments.” The probe remains ongoing.

Nine years after Congress approved $1.9 billion in disaster recovery money, the authority has spent just $570 million, representing less than one-third of the total.

“This failure has, to date, deprived Virgin Islanders of roughly $1.3 billion worth of assistance that Congress intended them to have,” the department stated in a July 20 letter to the head of the Virgin Islands Housing Finance Authority.

The letter went further, declaring that the authority’s “record demonstrates that it is an abysmal steward of taxpayer funds.”

The authority did not immediately return a request for comment.

The numbers show a stalled recovery. Investigators found that the authority completed only two of 95 planned single-family rental rehabilitation projects and none of 329 single- and multi-family housing projects. As of May, it had spent just 2 percent of its electrical grid recovery funding. At the same time, more than half the grant money set aside for administrative costs had already been spent.

The authority also sought $6.2 million in disaster-related funds that the Federal Emergency Management Agency had already paid.

Turner accused officials on social media of prioritizing “kickbacks over helping families recover from disasters.”

The authority’s former chief operating officer, Darin Richardson, who oversaw disaster recovery programs, is currently in federal prison after convictions on fraud and money-laundering charges. According to Turner, that official inflated a lumber contract meant to rebuild hurricane-damaged homes from $3 million to $4.5 million, took a $107,000 kickback, “and let the lumber rot in the sun, rendering it useless—a waste of taxpayer funds.”

In February, the executive director of the housing authority, Eugene Jones Jr., resigned as local legislators pressed questions about $4.2 million that remained untapped with a September spending deadline approaching. Virgin Islands State Sen. Kurt Vialet accused the former director of “just sitting there with a smug look.”

“The Housing Finance Authority is not building. You can’t be upset at senators being frustrated,” Vialet was quoted as saying by the St. Thomas Source, a local news site.

Hurricane Irma, a Category 5 storm, struck the U.S. Virgin Islands in September 2017. Roughly two weeks later, Hurricane Maria, also a Category 5, hit St. Croix. The territory has yet to fully recover.

Keep reading

Trump Greenlights 30-Year U.S.-Saudi Nuclear Cooperation Deal, Positioning American Companies to Lead Saudi Civilian Nuclear Development

President Donald Trump has formally approved a landmark 30-year nuclear cooperation agreement with Saudi Arabia, clearing the way for U.S. support of the kingdom’s civilian nuclear energy program and deepening one of Washington’s most important strategic partnerships in the Middle East.

The agreement, valued at tens of billions of dollars, positions American companies as the primary partners in developing Saudi Arabia’s nuclear infrastructure while limiting opportunities for competitors such as China and Russia.

According to U.S. officials and multiple reports, the accord could also allow Saudi Arabia to enrich uranium on its own territory under a civilian nuclear framework—a provision that has already sparked debate among lawmakers and nonproliferation experts.

President Trump reportedly approved the agreement late last week. It is expected to be formally signed on Wednesday by U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Saudi Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman.

The pact builds on negotiations completed in late 2025 and follows commitments made during Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s visit to Washington. It establishes the legal framework for U.S. assistance in constructing nuclear power plants, developing supporting infrastructure, and transferring civilian nuclear technology to the kingdom.

Supporters describe the agreement as a major geopolitical victory that reinforces the U.S.-Saudi alliance while ensuring that American companies—not Chinese or Russian state-backed firms—lead one of the world’s largest emerging nuclear energy projects.

The most controversial aspect of the agreement is its reported allowance for Saudi Arabia to pursue uranium enrichment within its civilian nuclear program.

Previous U.S. nuclear cooperation agreements often required partner nations to permanently renounce uranium enrichment and plutonium reprocessing—the so-called “gold standard” of nonproliferation. Reports indicate that this agreement adopts a more flexible approach, incorporating safeguards designed to prevent military use while stopping short of requiring the full implementation of the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) Additional Protocol, which provides the agency with broader inspection authority.

Administration officials maintain that the agreement includes sufficient protections to ensure the program remains exclusively peaceful. Critics, however, argue that relaxing long-standing U.S. standards could weaken global nonproliferation efforts.

Keep reading

Stop the Presses! Congress Denies Netanyahu Something He Asked For!

“I want to stop American aid,” Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on June 30. “It’s like welfare; I don’t want it.”

Usually, Netanyahu gets anything he demands from Uncle Sugar. But on July 15, the US House of Representatives voted, 314-104 against even partially granting his wish.

Every Republican except Thomas Massie of Kentucky, and more than half of Democrats, voted down an amendment that would have removed $3.3 billion in “Foreign Military Financing” aid from the National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs Appropriations Act.

What’s up with that?

Was Netanyahu perhaps a wee bit disingenuous in his public request, passing word through back channels that he didn’t really mean it?

Is US Congress more “pro-Israeli” than Netanyahu himself, or perhaps just so addicted to spending that they can’t bear to cut anything at all, even if the recipient doesn’t want it?

Some combination of the above?

This may be the first time I’ve ever found myself in agreement with Benjamin Netanyahu on anything.

Well, partial agreement, anyway.

US aid to Israel isn’t “like welfare.”

It IS welfare.

What does the US regime in return for its billions of dollars per year? Two things:

  1. A way of re-routing tax money to crony “defense contractors” with Israel as the cut-out to obscure the  domestic end of the corporate welfare pipeline; and
  2. Dragged into a Middle Eastern garrison ethno-state’s every conflict with other regional powers — powers which substantially differ from Israel mainly in ethnicity, prevailing religion, and actually having some oil to make the entanglement worthwhile.

Don’t give me the “liberal democracy” stuff. The Israeli regime censors the press, bans political parties it doesn’t like, confines millions of Arabs to apartheid-style “homelands” as rightsless, non-voting serfs under Israeli rule, and just passed a law declaring that theological studies in one, and only one, religion are “fundamental” to its existence and thus deserving of exemption from the compulsory military hitch mere “secular” Jews serve. Politically, the main difference between Israel and Iran is that in Iran, Jews are guaranteed at least one seat in parliament.

Some “pro-Israel” — and “pro-US-aid-to-Israel” — people I talk with love to inform me that Israel has a longer average lifespan, a lower infant mortality rate, and a lower homicide rate (excluding the  Palestinians ruled by, and murdered by, Israeli troops) than the US.

That doesn’t strike me as the “gotcha” they seem to think. Could those billions in aid possibly have anything to do with the statistical differences? Every dollar in US aid is a dollar more the Israeli regime gets to spend on healthcare and police salaries instead of on weapons to power its expansionist foreign policy.

This time, Congress should have given Netanyahu what he said he wanted.

Keep reading

Italy Says NO to Blank Checks for Ukraine

The political mood across Europe is beginning to shift, and even governments that have strongly backed Ukraine are discovering that public opinion has its limits. Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has reportedly argued that Rome must place the soaring cost of living, particularly energy and fuel bills, ahead of expanding military commitments before next year’s elections. According to the Kyiv Post, Meloni has also resisted the idea of writing endless checks for Ukraine through Brussels while Italian households continue struggling with inflation and rising utility costs.

Europe’s leadership has spent years insisting there is no limit to what taxpayers should sacrifice for the war. People do not pay their electricity bills with speeches about democracy. They pay with shrinking paychecks, higher fuel costs, and businesses forced to absorb ever-rising energy prices. Elections have a way of exposing the difference between political slogans and economic reality. Meloni understands that if governments cannot keep the lights on or make life affordable, voters eventually remove them regardless of how many standing ovations they receive in Brussels.

“The government must prioritize easing the cost of living, particularly energy and fuel bills,” Meloni declared, later adding, “If we invest in defense, that money must remain in Italy, in our factories, in our research, in our territories.” Italy has already agreed to numerous defense spending increases through its union with both Brussels and NATO–it’s never enough. “After six summits in three and a half weeks, I’ll pass,” the Italian president said. “There is no disengagement from Ukraine. But neither can I afford to disengage from Italy.”

The sovereign debt crisis and the war cycle are converging. Brussels continues to behave as though every crisis can be solved with another spending package financed by debt. That is precisely how governments eventually destroy themselves. The bureaucrats believe taxpayers exist to fund whatever grand geopolitical project they devise next. Meanwhile, families are asking why they are paying more for electricity, heating, transportation, and food while billions continue flowing abroad. Governments ignore that question at their own peril.

The cracks are becoming impossible to hide. Hungary has challenged Brussels repeatedly over Ukraine funding, and while there is a new man at the helm, nationalist sentiment has not dissolved. Slovakia has openly linked its support for new aid packages to its own national energy security after suffering through the Druzhba pipeline dispute. Now Italy is placing domestic economic concerns ahead of the demands coming from Brussels.

Keep reading

Israel Debated: Why Palestine Is Rewriting the Rules of Domestic US Politics

A major showdown on the House floor seemed imminent. An amendment, advanced by the Rules Committee, was poised to force a rare and telling record vote on stripping Israel of $3.3 billion in annual US military aid.

Brought forward by Republican Representative Thomas Massie and drawing support from key progressive Democrats like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Greg Casar, the measure was set to put every lawmaker’s stance on unconditional foreign assistance under a public microscope.

However, the high-stakes vote never actually happened. On June 30, the entire legislative package collapsed under the weight of Washington’s internal political warfare. In a dramatic procedural twist, a coalition of Democrats and disgruntled conservative Republicans voted down the mandatory ‘rule’ required to even begin debating the underlying State Department spending bill.

But even if the vote on Massie’s amendment had occurred, the result would have been entirely predictable. It would have been defeated, as support for Israel on both sides of the congressional aisle remains structurally entrenched – even as the American public shifts against Israeli policy in historic numbers.

According to a watershed Gallup poll published on February 27, a plurality of Americans now sympathize more with the Palestinians than the Israelis, leading by a margin of 41 percent to 36 percent. This marked the first time since Gallup began tracking the metric over two decades ago that Israel did not hold the upper hand in public sympathy.

Yet the shift is part of a broader, undeniable trend. A nationwide survey published in late June 2026 by Quinnipiac University revealed that an unprecedented 48 percent of American voters now think the United States is “too supportive” of Israel – the highest percentage recorded since the pollster first began tracking the question in 2017.

This is precisely why Massie’s amendment carries such profound weight. It is significant not because US politicians have suddenly developed a collective moral conscience, but because recent election cycles represented the first time in modern American history where Palestine factored as a major, decisive variable in how citizens cast their ballots.

For years, conventional political analysts dismissed pro-Palestinian mobilization, claiming Americans only vote based on immediate socioeconomic interests and rigid party loyalties. That assessment has since proven faulty.

The political cost of Washington’s complicity became undeniable following the fallout of the 2024 presidential race, a reality later confirmed by those within the inner sanctums of power. In the post-election debates, senior administration insiders admitted that the handling of the Gaza genocide alienated core voter blocks.

The political cost of Washington’s complicity became undeniable after the 2024 presidential race. According to Axios, top Democratic strategists conducting the party’s post-election audit explicitly admitted to advocacy groups that internal party data proved the administration’s Gaza policy was a “net-negative” on the ballot.

This finding – disclosed during internal briefings by DNC autopsy author Paul Rivera – confirmed that the party’s unconditional backing of Israel directly fractured its base, and ultimately contributed to its loss of the elections.

Keep reading

Despite Media Claims, USAID Cuts DID NOT Kill 14 Million People

Critics of the U.S., along with mainstream media and Democratic lawmakers, have claimed that Elon Musk’s cuts to USAID have killed 14 million people. This claim fails on multiple levels. Musk did not cut USAID. As head of DOGE, he held no formal legal authority to cancel contracts or eliminate programs, and the formal cancellations were executed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

The death toll figures circulating in the press are not confirmed counts but forward projections spanning up to five years, derived from economic models that assume no alternative funding was found, no internal reallocation of funds occurred, and no recipient government, third-country government, or global aid organization stepped in to fill gaps, assumptions the evidence does not support. An examination of the countries most dependent on USAID funding finds no verified excess mortality data for 2025 or 2026 attributable to the cuts; what exists are modeled estimates, not death registries.

The White House stated in court that Musk was a senior presidential adviser with no formal decision-making authority. The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals confirmed that DOGE played a role in the dismantling of USAID. However, the court found that the cuts were approved by government officials. It also ruled that Musk’s social media statement claiming he had “fed USAID into the wood chipper” did not legally constitute evidence that he made those decisions.

Keep reading

Doug Casey on Swap Lines, Secret Bailouts, and the Weaponization of the Dollar

International Man: While the term “swap line” sounds technical and harmless, it seems like it’s just a euphemism for a bailout.

What does it say when Washington starts extending swap lines to countries like Argentina and the UAE?

Doug Casey: First, we should define what a swap line is. It basically amounts to the US giving a foreign country X amount of currency in dollars, and the other country paying for it by giving the US the same amount in their currency. For decades, US dollar swap lines were mostly reserved for major allies and core financial centers around the world.

It’s a problem, however, with countries whose currencies have no value outside of their boundaries. A country that gets a swap line from the US is trading its paper for liquid and fungible dollars. The US may then get stuck with UAE dirhams or Argentine pesos. It’s trading real money for play money, Monopoly money.

In the case of Argentina, that swap line may never be repaid. The US might wind up being stuck with a bunch of worthless Argentine pesos.

When the US gives a foreign country a swap line, it basically creates those dollars out of nothing. They enter the banking system and debase the dollar. Doing so gives the US some leverage over a country that takes the swap.

But it’s a pretty expensive way of getting leverage.

International Man: In Argentina’s case, the US framed the swap line as a stabilizing measure. But was this really about financial stability, or was it about propping up a politically important ally at a critical moment?

Doug Casey: Since Milei is Trump’s new BFF, the swap was intended to help Argentina’s perennially weak economy, thereby helping Milei. That’s great for the moment, but now Argentina has to deal with another $30 billion of debt. I would’ve recommended Milei default on all of Argentina’s debts to the IMF, the World Bank, and the US—that might have worked during Milei’s first few months. “I’m sorry, everyone. We just don’t have the ability to pay right now. Wait until I set things straight.” I’m not sure that Argentina would’ve been punished badly for that. Third World countries default all the time.

Instead, Argentina taking the swap just indebts them by another $30 billion. The way to look at this is that future generations of young Argentines are being turned into serfs in order to repay that swap line, along with the rest of the debt.

Milei should have called a spade a spade and admitted bankruptcy instead of going further into debt to keep the Ponzi scheme going.

Argentina’s financial situation under Milei is very strange. The country theoretically owns two million ounces of gold. A million of those ounces were already sitting in London. But then, as soon as Milei got into office, he physically transferred another 440,000 ounces to London, saying that they were safer there. Which is an obvious lie; there’s no reason to think they’ll ever return.

That’s on top of buying 24 F-16s from Denmark—totally useless planes for Argentina—for another $350 million, plus $150 million per year in maintenance. And failing to abolish the central bank, which was a centerpiece of his election campaign. And worse, using the central bank to maintain the peso at ridiculously high levels, which is serving to bankrupt thousands of small businesses.

These stupidities might make the $30 billion swap seem necessary.

Keep reading

How the Deep State Intel Community, USAID & Stolen Elections are all Connected

He tapped Bill Pulte to serve as Acting Director of National Intelligence, and the reaction from the media, Democrats, and the intelligence establishment tells you everything you need to know. They are furious.

Why? Because Pulte is doing exactly what many Americans have demanded for years. He’s cleaning house.

Within days of taking over, reports indicate dozens of employees inside the Office of the Director of National Intelligence were either fired or sent packing as the administration moves to shrink what President Trump has called a bloated intelligence bureaucracy.

And here’s the kicker. Almost immediately, anti-Pulte leaks started pouring out of the intelligence community. The same people who claim to be defending democracy are running to the media to undermine the man tasked with reforming their agency. If there was ever proof that the swamp still exists, this is it.

To me, those leaks are not an argument against Bill Pulte. They’re the strongest argument for him.

The intelligence community was never supposed to operate as an independent power center. It exists to serve the American people, not protect itself. Yet every time someone comes along promising accountability, downsizing, and reform, the knives come out.

The media says Pulte is dangerous. Democrats say he’s unqualified. Washington insiders are panicking. Frankly, that makes me like the appointment even more.

Today, we break down why Bill Pulte may be exactly the deep state slayer President Trump was looking for, why the leaks prove the purge is necessary, and why the intelligence establishment is terrified of what could come next.

Keep reading

USAID Liberal Corruption and Circular Funding: How Taxpayer Dollars Were Used Against U.S. Policies and Interests

President Trump was criticized for cutting USAID funding shortly after taking office in his second term. He argued that USAID was plagued by waste, fraud, and corruption, with taxpayer money funding projects such as DEI workplace training in Serbia and transgender theater productions in Ireland.

The White House released a documented list of expenditures that included hundreds of thousands of dollars to a nonprofit linked to designated terrorist organizations after an OIG investigation had been launched, millions to EcoHealth Alliance, which was involved in research related to the Wuhan lab, and funding that resulted in hundreds of thousands of meals being distributed to al Qaeda-affiliated fighters in Syria.

Beyond waste and fraud, USAID funds also flowed to organizations that were at odds with U.S. interests, including groups that funded protests against U.S. policies within the United States and undermined US policy abroad.

George Soros, one of the largest donors to the Democratic Party and left-wing causes in the United States, became a central figure in the USAID corruption debate. Open Society Foundations has stated that claims it receives USAID funds or directs USAID spending are “manifestly false.” However, the organization’s own records and federal grant data indicate a financial relationship with USAID.

The Soros Foundations’ 2001 annual report listed USAID as a “donor partner,” while congressional testimony by Tyler O’Neil, citing USASpending.gov records, documented USAID grants to the Alliance for Open Society International, a legal arm of the Open Society Foundations. The grants were identified by federal grant numbers AID122A000200042, SLMAQM11GR635, and SLMAQM11GR0635. The arrangement creates a circular flow of taxpayer money, with federal funds flowing to Soros-linked organizations that then support left-wing activism, protests, and Democrat-aligned groups.

In addition to funding Soros-linked organizations directly, USAID awarded more than $27 million to the Tides Center, an organization that has received tens of millions of dollars from Soros’s Open Society Foundations.

The Tides Center functions as a donor-advised fund that masks the identity of original donors. Its grants do not disclose which donor directed the funds, and the IRS does not require donor disclosure. Tides founder Drummond Pike stated, “Anonymity is very important to most of the people we work with.” In 2023, the Tides network took in nearly $800 million, with major donors including Soros, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, and the Ford Foundation.

Keep reading