As taxpayers raise concerns about corruption in Ukraine, President Volodymyr Zelensky told Ben Shapiro he would be open to an audit into the use of American funds.
In a face-to-face exclusive interview with Shapiro in war-town Kyiv, Zelensky said he is prepared to allow inspectors to review how the more than $174 billion in American aid has been used to support Ukraine’s war against Russia.
“We’re always ready for any audit,” Zelensky said. “There’s nothing to hide. We are absolutely open, transparent, and that is what’s happening.”
Zelensky said that U.S. inspectors have had oversight following Russia attempting to “undermine the support and assistance coming from the United States” through “fake news and other tools” at the start of the war.
Zelensky added that he is “grateful to all the U.S. taxpayers.”
<iframe loading="lazy" title="YouTube video player" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/cVRuLaEJij0?si=6ihnZq_GRHdW7Uty" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe> 
“We are grateful to the bipartisan support in Congress,” he said. “We are grateful to the unity around the fight of Ukraine for independence…and the great contribution of the United States in the defense of our people.”
He added that he has his own “internal audit” where his government is “documenting how much assistance was provided.”
According to Zelensky, Ukraine has received $104-$105 billion in assistance, most of which comes in the form of military support.
“The money was paid to the transportation of those weapons,” Zelensky said. “Ukrainian companies were not allowed to transport this money. That&#8217;s why we haven&#8217;t received it — not in the public, not in the private sector — the money for the transportation.”
According to the <a href="https://www.gao.gov/ukraine-oversight">U.S. Government Accountability Office</a>, Congress appropriated more than $174 billion for Ukraine. The funds have been used for security assistance and weaponry, or for economic and humanitarian assistance, including direct budget support for the Ukrainian government, aid for refugees, improving the health sector, and repairing infrastructure such as the energy grid.
Zelensky said he is not attempting to argue with the United States by claiming he is getting nearly $70 billion less than the United States government is reporting.
“It&#8217;s important that both countries and — the taxpayers know — where their money is,” he said. “In terms of the use of that money primarily, it was for the weapons that were used on the battlefield.”
In total, the Ukrainian government was directly given $22.9 billion by USAID for direct budget support, mostly for reimbursing salaries for teachers, civil servants, and healthcare workers, according to the GAO.
“We are very grateful for all that,” Zelensky said. “The United States has to know that they were not feeding our pensioners and our soldiers with regards to the salary or the compensation. Surely you&#8217;ve provided the most important aspects — that is the weapons.”
The GAO recommended several ways to improve oversight of funding in Ukraine, including tracking the unprecedented amount of military equipment given to the country, making training initiatives more efficient, properly assessing the value of assets given, and more.
The report also points out that the State Department does not have a “systematic, comprehensive approach to specifically track funding that federal agencies have provided for economic and humanitarian assistance to Ukraine.”
Zelensky argued that the United States benefited from providing financial support to Ukraine because it has received intel about weaponry, including drones being used in the current conflict.
Zelensky added that Ukraine is keeping Russia from invading NATO countries that would pull the United States into a much larger war.
“I’ve mentioned it many times before, the U.S will have to protect the other NATO countries, because such an agreement exists, or the U.S. will have to leave NATO,” Zelensky said. “ So as long as Russians are not in any single NATO member nation, your families are not facing this question. So that will be a major question for your families: Are they going to send your child to war?&#8221;

Ben Shapiro and President Zelensky.24-Apr-2025

Zelensky Tells Ben Shapiro He’s Open To An Audit On How Ukraine Spends U.S. Taxpayer Dollars

Ben Shapiro

Ukraine-Russia War

USAID

Volodymyr Zelensky

In a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/as-democrat-warplane-takes-flak-audacity-remains-intact">recent piece,</a> I analogized the Democrats&#8217; propaganda machine and the heart of their political strategy to an F-47 Stealth Fighter — one of the most expensive, sophisticated, and powerful weapons in existence. I would like to build on that comparison and clarify three big problems emerging with the Democrat warplane.
<h3>#1. Their stealth fighter has lost a lot of its stealth</h3>
Thanks to whistleblowers, the <a href="https://x.com/mtaibbi/status/1598822959866683394">Twitter Files release</a>, the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/jim-jordan-releases-new-facebook-files-highlights-how-biden-admin-sought-to-suppress-daily-wire-content">Facebook censorship documents</a>, a few brave reporters, and the DOGE exposure of the USAID fraud, the most surreptitious and underhanded features of the Democrat war machine have now been revealed to the American public. Their use of taxpayer money and government agency clout to simultaneously fund and/or threaten respective media platforms and individuals regarding their positions and messaging became apparent. The public now clearly sees exactly how pseudo support has been astroturfed by the Left for their causes and candidates — and competing voices extinguished.
In his recent essay &#8220;<a href="https://www.realclearbooks.com/articles/2025/03/06/the_artificial_culture_1095413.html">The Artificial Culture</a>,&#8221; Mathew Gasda describes the landscape: 
<blockquote>If you want to ask why certain so-called socialist, left-leaning magazines failed to ever substantially criticize the DNC and Democratic politics in more than a superficial way (despite positioning themselves as independent or even adversarial), it&#8217;s because they were functionally part of the DNC (as evidenced by their reliance on grants from foundations tied to Democratic donors, they&#8217;re hiring patterns, favoring staff with direct party affiliations, and their editorial alignment with DNC priorities during election cycles), part of DNC patronage networks (with documented financial ties to progressive nonprofits, think tanks, and media funds that coordinate messaging with the party).</blockquote>
NGOs play a critical role in supporting this messaging, not only by funding media platforms and supportive activists, but by providing employment to loyal soldiers. In “<a href="https://amuseonx.substack.com/p/subsidizing-the-left-how-ngos-became">Subsidizing the Left: How NGOs Become a Jobs Program for Democrats</a>,” AmuseOnX explains how NGOs and USAID itself have been critical parts of this Democrat apparatus, pointing out that “over 90% of pass-through organizations are run by Left-wing activists and politically connected individuals from prior Democrat administrations.” Often, the pass-through has multiple layers, obscuring purpose and usage. As but one example, he points to the Climate Justice Alliance, which received some $50 million from the EPA supposedly to fight climate change, but instead, funneled this taxpayer money into pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel propaganda campaigns in the U.S., helping to fuel campus protests.
USAID has been exposed as a gigantic <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/rubio-announces-83-of-usaid-programs-cancelled-musk-calls-move-tough-but-necessary">slush fund</a> for the Left. Elon Musk concluded bluntly that USAID is beyond repair, calling it a “<a href="https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1886102414194835755">criminal organization</a>” and “<a href="https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1886098373251301427?lang=en">a viper’s nest filled with radical-left Marxists that hate America</a>.” Tellingly, former State Department official <a href="https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1886098373251301427?lang=en">Mike Benz responded</a> to that post with, “I cannot adequately convey to you how many dozens of former members of the intelligence community have written to me this exact sentiment about USAID.”
The public now understands both that they were deceived, and somewhat how they were deceived. But even if they don’t understand all of the parameters of the latter, they now solidly grasp the former.
<h3>#2. Their stealth fighter has lost significant clout</h3>
David Samuels’ piece “<a href="https://www.tabletmag.com/feature/rapid-onset-political-enlightenment">Rapid-Onset Political Enlightenment — How Barack Obama Built an Omnipotent Thought-Machine and How It Was Destroyed”</a> explains how, aided by a massive shift in consumer usage to digital format and his embrace of chief strategist David Axelrod’s “permission structures,” Obama was able to architect a “digital switchboard” controlled by a small class of operatives and essentially create the realities he desired.
With command of this network says Samuels:
<blockquote>Catchphrases like ‘defund the police,’ ‘structural racism,’ ‘white privilege,’ ‘children don’t belong in cages,’ ‘assigned gender,’ or ‘stop the genocide in Gaza’ would emerge and marinate in meme-generating pools like the academy or activist organizations, and then jump the fence — or be fed — into rich groups and threads on Twitter and Reddit.</blockquote>
He goes on to outline how Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter broke the stranglehold of this new digital leviathan which not only allowed for counter-narratives, but exposed the unethical and likely illegal methods used by the Democrat administrations to censor and promote various stories.
The 2024 Presidential election pivoted largely on a growing portion of the electorate <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/the-2024-election-was-a-referendum-on-reality">recognizing the absurdity</a> of many leftist claims. The Left had finally jumped the shark. <a href="https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2025/03/18/nolte-disgraced-ap-lies-about-tulsi-gabbard-describing-trump-and-putin-as-very-good-friends/">John Nolte</a> outlines a sampling of over 40 hoaxes reported as truths by the AP over the last several years including topics ranging from the origins of COVID, the lockdown mandates, and vaccine efficacy, to Hunter Biden’s laptop, to tropes about various leaders like Trump, Biden, Pelosi, and Gabbard to the belief in multiple genders, to the environment, to January 6, and more.
Thanks to the debunking of those hoaxes and others, most Americans, including a growing number of Independents, no longer trust or believe in the Democrat orthodoxy that has been endlessly repeated through mainstream and social media.
Canadian philosopher Marshall McLuhan first advised us that the medium cannot be separated from the message. And a bit prior to him, Aristotle admonished us that “We are what we repeatedly do.” Thus, a growing number of Americans are rightly concluding, ipso facto, that the people who have been trying to get them to swallow these whoppers are liars.
Thus exposed, Democrats and their media sycophants have been reduced to <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5176848-democrats-protest-trump-congress/">pouting</a>, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/10-dems-join-gop-to-censure-rep-al-green-for-heckling-trump">yelling</a>, and crying while their approval ratings plummet to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/biden-closes-out-2024-with-cratering-approval-rating">record lows</a>. Further, in lock-step, the credibility/viewership of sycophant media outlets is withering. A <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/651977/americans-trust-media-remains-trend-low.aspx">2024 Gallup poll</a> shows that Americans now see the news media as the least trusted group among 10 U.S. civic and political institutions involved in the democratic process — even lower than Congress. The polling firm reported, “For the third consecutive year, more U.S. adults have no trust at all in the media (36%) than trust it a great deal or fair amount. Another 33% of Americans express ‘not very much’ confidence.” This means that trust in the mass media is at its lowest point in five decades.
This sharp drop in credibility is utterly devastating to Democrats. Since the Obama reign, Democrats have grown accustomed to the luxury of being able to spin whatever hokum they desired with unquestioned belief and support from the requisite number of politicians and voters.
<h3>#3. Their stealth fighter is very, very expensive to operate</h3>
How do you ensure that media outlets and their representatives will push some stories and quash others? You pay them. A quick review of the <a href="https://www.newstarget.com/2025-02-08-usaid-funds-6000-journalists-1000-platforms-worldwide.html">USAID funding</a> shows that some 6,200 journalists at nearly 1,000 different platforms, including hundreds of NGO’s, were receiving USAID payments of some form — including but in no way limited to the AP, Reuters, The BBC, and Politico. This was an expensive proposition indeed — to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars. Even more <a href="https://oversight.house.gov/release/doge-subcommittee-chairwoman-greene-opens-hearing-by-exposing-the-dark-truth-about-usaids-mission-to-undermine-u-s-interests/">USAID funds</a>, perhaps tens of billions of dollars, were funneled to far-Left opposition groups, NGOs, and <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/3313896/usaid-gave-270-million-soros-ngo-only-needed-9-million-doom-democracy-albania/">Soros-related projects</a> and candidates. DOGE is now working to shut that down.
One of Democrats’ largest fundraising organizations, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/serious-loophole-allowing-democrats-actblue-to-potentially-accept-illegal-political-contributions-congress">ActBlue</a>, which has funneled over $16 billion to all levels of Democrat campaigns since its inception seems to be imploding amid <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/texas-attorney-general-finds-suspicious-untraceable-donations-made-on-dem-fundraising-site">allegations of fraud</a>, foreign money <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/serious-loophole-allowing-democrats-actblue-to-potentially-accept-illegal-political-contributions-congress">laundering</a>, and sponsoring terrorism. At least seven senior officers have left the organization and congressional investigations loom. To make matters worse, the Dem’s usual billionaire class may be defecting. <a href="https://www.dailysignal.com/2025/03/27/the-real-oligarchs-whove-been-running-our-country/">Victor Davis Hanson</a> speculates that Larry Ellison, Mark Zuckerberg, and perhaps even Jeff Bezos appear to be questioning their Democrat loyalty as demonstrated by some of their recent hesitancy to provide usual levels of support.
Without the usual hundreds of billions of dollars, clandestine and otherwise, to update and expand the capabilities of their warplane, it will quickly become both antiquated and impotent.
The Democrat stealth fighter has been exposed. Its methods of funding and the damage it has both inflicted and incurred over the last few years are massive stories. The future of the Democratic Party in the near term seems inextricably bound to this machine — particularly because Democrats seem to be doubling down on keeping it as an integral part of their strategy. Damaged or not, that is currently all they have.
* * *
Greg Salsbury, Ph.D. is former president of Western Colorado University and Board of Advisor member for <a href="https://starrs.us">STARRS.US</a>.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

TOPSHOT-US-VOTE-POLITICS-DEMOCRATIC-CONVENTION

‘Mayday, Mayday’ For The Democrat Warplane

'Mayday, Mayday' For The Democrat Warplane

Congress

Democratic Party

Democrats

Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)

DOGE

Elon Musk

Opinion

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Elon Musk hinted at a Wisconsin town hall that he and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) project might be planning to do some digging on Capitol Hill.
Musk was in Wisconsin ahead of the state&#8217;s Tuesday Supreme Court election, which conservative Brad Schimel ultimately lost to liberal Susan Crawford, and some of the questions he took from those in the audience centered around his work in President Donald Trump&#8217;s administration with DOGE.
One attendee asked whether DOGE had uncovered any payments from USAID to far-Left members of Congress like Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) or Sens. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Chuck Schumer (D-NY) — and Musk noted that it wasn&#8217;t quite as simple as finding bank records that showed direct payments to specific members of Congress.
WATCH;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Elon Musk: “There is a massive amount of corruption… effectively there’s a giant fraud loophole where the government can send money to an NGO that is then no longer the government by the laws of the U.S., let’s just say there are a lot of strangely wealthy members of Congress..” <a href="https://t.co/Gy2Q38o5hj">pic.twitter.com/Gy2Q38o5hj</a>
&mdash; America (@america) <a href="https://twitter.com/america/status/1906516590595572106?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 31, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;There is a massive amount of corruption,&#8221; Musk began. &#8220;But it is circuitous, so what happens is there&#8217;s money that — obviously it&#8217;s your taxpayer money — that is then sent to various government organizations who then send it to NGOs. An NGO is a Non-Governmental Organization, but obviously if it&#8217;s a government-funded Non Governmental Organization, it&#8217;s just an organization, it&#8217;s just the government.&#8221;
&#8220;And effectively, there’s a giant fraud loophole, which is that the government can send money to an NGO that is then no longer governed by law — the laws of the United States,&#8221; Musk continued. &#8220;They’ll send the money overseas to one NGO, then they’ll go through a bunch of them, and then I’m highly confident that a bunch of that money then comes back to the United States and lands in the pockets of the people you just mentioned.&#8221;
&#8220;But it is a circuitous route,&#8221; he repeated. &#8220;It doesn’t go directly, but let’s just say that there’s a lot of strangely wealthy members of Congress where I’m trying to connect the dots of, ‘How did they become rich?&#8217;”

US-POLITICS-TRUMP

Elon Musk Hints Next DOGE Target Could Be The ‘Strangely Wealthy’ Members Of Congress

Corruption

Donald Trump

Politics

WASHINGTON—The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) submitted an official notification to Congress on Friday that the State Department will be assuming responsibility for most of the agency&#8217;s functions and ongoing programming.
All personnel will receive a Reduction in Force (RIF) notification on Friday, a USAID official shared with The Daily Wire, informing them that all non-statutory positions at USAID will be eliminated. That includes USAID employees around the world.
Approximately 4,600 USAID personnel will be RIF&#8217;d across the agency&#8217;s foreign and civil service.
Personnel will begin receiving RIF notices via email within a few minutes of that notification. Those notices will specify one of two final separation dates: either July 1, 2025, or September 2, 2025.
The historic move realigns the United States&#8217; handling of foreign aid, implementing foreign policy to align with the interest of President Donald Trump&#8217;s administration. USAID officials say that bringing its programs under the State Department umbrella will enhance the impact, efficiency, accountability, and uniformity of its foreign assistance programs.
In a Friday statement, USAID Deputy Administrator and Chief Operating Officer Jeremy Lewin said the agency has strayed from its original mission to help stem the world&#8217;s &#8220;gravest crises and support allies in need.&#8221; 
&#8220;But the independent establishment of USAID has grown inefficient and unwieldy, too often contradicting rather than reinforcing the foreign policy of the President and nation,&#8221; he said.
&#8220;By bringing USAID’s core life-saving and strategic aid programs under the umbrella of the State Department, this Administration will significantly enhance the efficiency, accountability, uniformity, and strategic impact of foreign assistance programs – and ensure that our nation and President speaks with one voice in foreign affairs,&#8221; Lewin added.
USAID argues that the move is not about ending foreign aid, but reorienting how the United States delivers aid to &#8220;maximize impact,&#8221; adopting a &#8220;returns-oriented mindset&#8221; and centering on &#8220;American strategic interests.&#8221;
&#8220;Like any restructuring, there will inevitably be disruptions,&#8221; Lewin said. &#8220;From Secretary Rubio down, we are committed to ensuring that USAID personnel remain safe and that the Agency’s ongoing life-saving aid programs remain both intact and operational.&#8221;
Over the next three months, USAID and the State Department will work closely to transfer USAID&#8217;s programming over. During this period, the State Department will be assessing its own needs and conducting an independent hiring process, which will be available to eligible USAID employees. A USAID official told The Daily Wire that the agency has to wait 60 days before they can rehire someone at a different government agency — giving notice today will potentially allow employees who are RIF&#8217;d to be rehired at State in 60 days.
By July 1, 2025, the State Department will have assumed responsibility for USAID&#8217;s remaining programming, and many USAID employees will have gone over to the State Department or will be seeking other employment. Officials expect that USAID&#8217;s operations will all have been transferred, or otherwise shut down, over to the State Department by September 2, 2025.
Currently, USAID has 898 active and ongoing programs that total an estimated cost of about $78 billion and an unobligated remaining value of $8.3 billion.
Since January 20, a total of 5,341 awards have been terminated, USAID says, representing a total estimated cost of $75.9 billion and unobligated savings of $27.7 billion.

USAID To Lay Off 4,600 Employees, Will Merge With State Department By Fall

State Department

An Obama-appointed judge who is blocking the Trump administration’s attempt to shut down the the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has donated thousands of dollars to Democrats, served as a leader in his local Democratic Party organization, and has a history of stonewalling President Donald Trump’s border security efforts.
U.S. District Court Judge Theodore David Chuang of Maryland ruled this week that the Trump administration’s attempt to shutdown USAID through the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) was unconstitutional, <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/judge-finds-doges-usaid-shutdown-likely-unconstitutional/">ordering</a> Elon Musk and DOGE officials to reinstate employee access to the email and payment systems.
That ruling came just after the Obama-appointed judge issued a different decision hindering the Trump administration&#8217;s ability to arrest and deport illegal aliens. Chuang <a href="https://www.courthousenews.com/judge-grants-injunction-barring-immigration-arrests-at-some-houses-of-worship/">granted a temporary injunction</a> last month preventing Department of Homeland Security agents from arresting illegal aliens at certain places of worship.
Chuang has a history of leftwing politics. The Obama-appointed judge donated over $4,700 to various Democrats, Federal Election Commission <a href="https://www.fec.gov/data/receipts/individual-contributions/?contributor_name=theodore+chuang">data shows</a>. Chuang donated to a variety of candidates and organizations, including Obama for America, John Kerry for President, and the Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee in Maryland.
Chuang even <a href="https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Theodore-Chuang-Senate-Judiciary-Questionnaire-Final.pdf">served</a> as the vice president of the Montgomery County District 16 Democratic Club before becoming a federal judge, and was on the board of directors of the Coalition of Asian Pacific American Democrats of Maryland.
Chuang also impeded border security efforts during Trump’s first administration, <a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/03/15/520171478/trump-travel-ban-faces-court-hearings-by-challengers-today">blocking</a> the ban on travel from Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, Iran, Syria, and Libya.
The Obama appointee ruled against the Trump administration again in 2020 when he <a href="https://www.lwvor.org/post/o-what-a-tangled-web-we-weave-the-fate-of-mifepristone-in-judge-kacsmaryk-s-court">issued an injunction</a> against the Food and Drug Administration’s rule that abortion drugs must be picked up in-person and could not be sent through the mail. A Daily Wire <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/how-leftist-networks-flood-red-states-with-risky-abortion-pills-with-no-consequences">investigation</a> revealed that leftwing organizations are now sending abortion pills in the mail to people without prescriptions, even when it runs afoul of state laws against abortions.
Chuang is just one of several leftwing judges who have recently worked to stonewall Trump&#8217;s agenda. Judge James Boasberg, who ruled against Trump&#8217;s use of the Alien Enemies Act to swiftly deport Venezuelan gang members, has repeatedly hindered the president&#8217;s immigration policies and spared one ex-FBI agent connected to the Russiagate hoax from prison. Boasberg&#8217;s wife is the founder of a Washington, D.C.-area abortion clinic and donated more than $11,000 to Democrats, The Daily Wire <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/meet-the-obama-appointed-judge-trying-to-stop-trump-from-deporting-criminal-illegals">revealed.</a>
There&#8217;s also Judge Amir Ali, who recently ordered the Trump administration to unfreeze foreign aid. Ali not only donated to Democratic candidates for public office, but also worked for a far-left organization that sought to defund the police and advocated for prosecutors to drop charges against Black Lives Matter rioters, The Daily Wire <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/federal-judge-who-stonewalled-trumps-foreign-aid-freeze-has-a-long-history-of-liberal-activism">reported</a>.

Judge Theodore Chuang

Obama-Appointed Judge Trying To Stop The USAID Shutdown Donated Thousands To Dems

Court

deportation

Judge

Trump

A government inspector general on Wednesday sounded the alarm about problems with the now-shuttered U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and underscored how “non-government organizations” receive billions of dollars from the United States in corruption-prone regions with limited accountability.
The Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction said in a new report that “since the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan in August 2021, the U.S. government has spent billions of U.S. taxpayer funds on projects intended to provide for Afghans’ basic needs.”
The report said the State Department and USAID have turned to Public International Organizations, its term for NGOs, “as the primary means of delivering this aid,” but “have been inconsistent in their efforts to formally require PIOs to agree to U.S. government oversight on how funding is spent and whether projects are delivering intended results” rather than being “diverted to the Taliban.”
For example, the USAID Mission to Afghanistan’s standard contract with NGOs did not require them to permit American officials to visit to see what they were actually doing.
USAID had a contract with a third-party monitoring group whose visits it could have used as the next-best thing to American eyes on the ground, but it seemingly paid that group without actually having it do any visits, the <a href="https://www.sigar.mil/Portals/147/Files/Reports/Audits-and-Inspections/Performance-Audits/SIGAR-25-16-AR.pdf">inspector general’s report</a> said.
USAID seemed to simply trust the groups receiving the money, which were often partnerships with foreign governments. That didn’t always go well.
For example, USAID funded the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) for a “water, sanitation, and hygiene project in Afghanistan&#8221; in 2024. It never bothered to visit. The inspector general did, and “found numerous issues that UNICEF did not report to USAID. Had USAID conducted site visits, it could have identified these deficiencies and asked UNICEF to address them.”
Likewise, State Department units in highly sensitive areas, such as the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs/ Office of Weapons Removal and Abatement, paid for programs whose operators wouldn’t even let their benefactors check on them.
The weapons removal office did not make site visits part of its contracts, and some beneficiaries, including the UN Mine Action Service, “refused site visits.” Those visits would have been helpful because it turned out that the groups weren’t always forthcoming. The UN Mine group at one point “suspended activities due to Taliban officials attempting to renegotiate the PIO’s operating agreements,” but didn’t tell the State Department until months later.
Only one out of five State Department bureaus reviewed by the inspector general included language in its standard contract saying “the recipient agrees to allow access for site visits by USAID and/or its agents as necessary.”
The State Department also does not require PIOs to report instances of “diversion,” which means “instances of waste, fraud, abuse, corruption, coercion, aid diversion, and interference” by groups like the Taliban.
USAID is supposed to require its contractors to report such misconduct, but “USAID/AFG included an optional diversion reporting clause in only some of its project contributions.”
“Without diversion reporting, USAID and State will not know the true extent to which the Taliban is interfering with and benefiting from U.S. funded activities,” the inspector general said.
State’s Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs and the weapons removal office “do not include a reporting diversion clause in their agreement templates,” meaning “the bureaus may not be receiving timely reporting on incidents of diversion or interference” despite the obvious potential for fraud or deadly interference by terror-supporting groups.
Some instances of that are known. For example, in 2024 the Taliban asked State Department beneficiaries to make a list of people who were receiving benefits, and to let the Taliban be involved in selecting who would benefit. The Taliban also forced the NGO to suspend “mental health and psychosocial support activities, as well as suspension of a female youth center.”
State’s narcotics office (INL) may have also had a casual attitude towards aid diversion and transparency.
“When we asked INL for information about aid diversion in May 2023 and February 2024, it claimed to have no information. However, in September 2024, INL provided us with an October 2023 report from the Colombo Plan that outlined eight instances of Taliban interference,” it said. “The bureau learned about these instances through meetings in December 2022 and January 2023. INL did not explain why it did not share this information when we asked.”
The inspector general said the Secretary of State should require all agreements to allow site visits, and develop a standard process for beneficiaries to report fraud or misconduct.
“Monitoring projects through periodic site visits (including by third party monitors) is an essential management tool to help ensure that U.S. taxpayer money is not being wasted on projects that are not meeting their intended goals or that are undermined by interference by the Taliban,” it said.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said this week that most of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/rubio-announces-83-of-usaid-programs-cancelled-musk-calls-move-tough-but-necessary" target="_blank" rel="noopener">USAID has been abolished</a>, and its remaining programs will be moved to State. That decision came following concern that its grants and contracts often amounted to slush funds for nefarious international actors.

Trump And Musk’s USAID ‘Shut Down’ Threat Opens Door For China

USAID, State Failed To Monitor NGOs To Ensure They Weren’t Funding Taliban, IG Says

Afghanistan

Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced Monday that 83% of programs at the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) are being cancelled following a six week review.
“The 5200 contracts that are now cancelled spent tens of billions of dollars in ways that did not serve, (and in some cases even harmed), the core national interests of the United States,” <a href="https://x.com/marcorubio/status/1899021361797816325" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Rubio announced on X</a>.
The remaining 18%, around 1,000 programs, will be administered “more effectively” by the State Department, according to Rubio.
“Thank you to DOGE and our hardworking staff who worked very long hours to achieve this overdue and historic reform,” Rubio added.
Department of Government Efficiency head Elon Musk called the cuts “tough, but necessary.”
“The important parts of USAID should always have been with Dept of State,” <a href="https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1899068961649516978" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Musk said</a>.
In February a State Department source <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/rubio-cuts-60-billion-in-waste-from-state-department-usaid" target="_blank" rel="noopener">told The Daily Wire</a> that a Rubio-led review of grants and awards at the State Department and USAID resulted in $60 billion in savings for taxpayers.
“The State Department evaluated over 9,100 grants worth over $15.9 billion,” an internal government document obtained by The Daily Wire reads. “At the conclusion of an exhaustive review led by career FSOs and reviewed by senior political leadership, including the Secretary, over 4,100 grants worth nearly $4.4 billion were identified for elimination — a 28 percent reduction in total grant value over the course of the 15-day review.”
Rubio was named Acting Administrator for the USAID last month following scrutiny of the organization led by Musk.
In a statement, Rubio’s press team accused USAID of straying from “its original mission of responsibly advancing American interests abroad,” adding that “it is now abundantly clear that significant portions of USAID funding are not aligned with the core national interests of the United States.”
USAID, created in 1961 by President John F. Kennedy, gives tens of billions of dollars in civilian aid and development assistance to foreign countries each year. USAID had been separate from the State Department until Rubio’s appointment.

Marco Rubio Sworn In As US Secretary Of State

Rubio Announces 83% Of USAID Programs Cancelled, Musk Calls Move ‘Tough, But Necessary’

Marco Rubio

A very serious constitutional issue is currently being fought over, and the Supreme Court came down on the wrong side.
President Trump had a plan to cut into USAID spending. DOGE basically wiped out about $50 billion in USAID spending, reporting that money as not comporting with American standards of foreign policy. Thus, a temporary federal freeze, an impoundment, was essentially put on those funds. Then, a district court judge put a freeze on the freeze to allow that money to continue to go out the door.
The constitutional issue involved here is whether a district court judge has the capacity to simply shut down a presidential nationwide action.
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court of the United States, in a 5-4 vote, essentially remanded the case back to the district court, saying they need clarification as to why and how this is actually being done.
The five judges who voted in favor of doing so included three leftist judges — Elena Kagan, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and Sonia Sotomayor — and two conservatives — John Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett. The SCOTUS order <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a831_3135.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">stated</a>:
<blockquote>The United States District Court for the District of Columbia entered a temporary restraining order enjoining the Government from enforcing directives pausing disbursements of foreign development assistance funds. The present application does not challenge the Government’s obligation to follow that order. On February 25, the District Court ordered the Government to issue payments for a portion of the paused disbursements—those owed for work already completed before the issuance of the District Court’s temporary restraining order—by 11:59 p.m. on February 26.</blockquote>
There was an invoice because the work was already done. Does the federal government have to pay the bill?
The SCOTUS order continued:
<blockquote>The Chief Justice entered an administrative stay shortly before the 11:59 p.m. deadline and subsequently referred the application to the Court. The application is denied. Given that the deadline in the challenged order has now passed, and in light of the ongoing preliminary injunction proceedings, the District Court should clarify what obligations the Government must fulfill to ensure compliance with the temporary restraining order, with due regard for the feasibility of any compliance timelines.</blockquote>
It is unclear what the scope of this judgment is. SCOTUS is remanding the case back to the district court to figure out exactly what must be paused — and what doesn&#8217;t have to be. Are they saying the portion that has to go out is because the work has been completed? Or, are they saying pausing federal spending at all is not allowable? We will need clarification on that.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/bss-ep-2152-member-exclusive">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h3>
The decision elicited a harsh dissent from Justice Samuel Alito, who is awesome, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh.
In the same way some people rank their favorite baseball players, I rank my favorite Supreme Court justices: Thomas is at the top, followed closely by Alito.
Alito was terrific. He <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a831_3135.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">wrote</a>:
<blockquote>Does a single district-court judge who likely lacks jurisdiction have the unchecked power to compel the government of the United States to pay out (and probably lose forever) two billion taxpayer dollars? The answer to that question should be an emphatic “No,” but a majority of this court apparently thinks otherwise. I am stunned.</blockquote>
Alito did not pull any punches. He continued:
<blockquote>In capsule form, this is what happened. Respondents are a group of American businesses and nonprofits that receive foreign-assistance funds from the State Department and the U. S. Agency for International Development. They brought suit and claimed that the current administration’s temporary pause of foreign-assistance payments is unlawful. On February 13, 2025, the District Court issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) requiring the Government to halt its funding pause. It based that decision on a finding that respondents are likely to succeed in showing that the Government violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).
After issuing the TRO, the District Judge grew frustrated with the pace at which funds were being disbursed, and on February 25, he issued a second order requiring the Government to pay out approximately $2 billion. The judge brushed aside the Government’s argument that sovereign immunity barred this enforcement order, and he took two steps that, unless corrected, would prevent any higher court from reviewing and possibly stopping the payments. First, he labeled the order as a non-appealable TRO, and second, he demanded that the money be paid within 36 hours.
This left the Government little time to try to obtain some review of what it regarded as a lawless order. The Government moved for a stay pending appeal in the District Court. But the judge shrugged off the Government’s sovereign immunity argument and ignored the Government’s representation that most of the money in question, once disbursed, could probably not be recovered.</blockquote>
 Alito further explained:
<blockquote>To start, it is clear that the District Court’s enforcement order should be construed as an appealable preliminary injunction, not a mere TRO. A TRO, as its name suggests, is “temporary,” and its proper role is to “restrain” challenged conduct for a short time while the court considers whether more lasting relief is warranted.</blockquote>
A ”temporary restraining order” does not apply in this instance because it is not temporary; once the money is gone, it&#8217;s gone. A typical temporary restraining order could instruct not to engage in a particular action for a certain period of time. But a temporary restraining order cannot instruct one to pay a certain amount of money to a particular person, as that is not a temporary restraining order. Once the money has been paid, there is no clawing it back. This is Alito&#8217;s point.
Alito declared, “Nor did the order merely ‘restrain’ the Government’s challenged action in order to ‘preserve the status quo.’ Rather, it ‘act[s] as a mandatory injunction requiring affirmative action’ by the Government.”
“Even if the majority is unwilling to vacate the District Court’s order, it should at least stay the District Court’s enforcement order until the Government is able to petition for a writ of certiorari,” he wrote, meaning that the Supreme Court would take up the full case. 
He is right about all of this. He concluded:
<blockquote>Today, the Court makes a most unfortunate misstep that rewards an act of judicial hubris and imposes a $2 billion penalty on American taxpayers. The District Court has made plain its frustration with the Government, and respondents raise serious concerns about nonpayment for completed work. But the relief ordered is, quite simply, too extreme a response. A federal court has many tools to address a party’s supposed nonfeasance. Self-aggrandizement of its jurisdiction is not one of them. </blockquote>
All of this raises questions as to why Justices Roberts and Coney Barrett did what they did. It&#8217;s not as extreme an order as it originally seems from the Supreme Court when it basically says any district court judge anywhere can put a nationwide temporary restraining order on the federal government for any reason whatsoever.
But, as Justice Alito says, if the effect of the order is to force the federal government to disperse funds it can&#8217;t get back before the adjudication at the Supreme Court level, then that is a massive problem.
Alito is absolutely right about all of that.
We were expecting these types of issues to happen.
The reality is that because President Trump is moving fast and breaking things, there&#8217;s going to be a lot of legal action. Most of that legal action is going to redound to the benefit of the Trump administration.
Some will not.

Inauguration Of Donald Trump As 47th President Of The United States

The Supreme Court Attacks DOGE Cuts

Federal Government

President Trump

Samuel Alito

SCOTUS

Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Wednesday dealt a significant blow to the Trump administration when it ruled that the federal government must pay out $2 billion to U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) contractors.
In a 5-4 <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/24A831-Order-2.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">decision</a>, the Supreme Court rejected an emergency application from the Department of Justice seeking to overturn a district court judge’s demand that the administration unfreeze billions of dollars Trump halted through an executive order, NBC News <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-rejects-trump-administrations-bid-avoid-paying-usaid-con-rcna194230" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a>. All three leftist judges were joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a President Donald Trump appointee.
Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh wrote a scathing dissent, with Alito saying he was “stunned” by the majority’s decision.
&#8220;Does a single district-court judge who likely lacks jurisdiction have the unchecked power to compel the Government of the United States to pay out (and probably lose forever) 2 billion taxpayer dollars?” Alito asked in the dissenting opinion. “The answer to that question should be an emphatic ‘No,’ but a majority of this Court apparently thinks otherwise. I am stunned.&#8221;
Alito added that the majority effectively rewarded “an act of judicial hubris and imposes a $2 billion penalty on American taxpayers.”
The case began when a group of American businesses and nonprofits that receive funds from USAID claimed that Trump’s pause on foreign aid payments was unlawful. U.S. District Judge Amir Ali quickly issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) preventing the Trump administration from following through with the funding freeze. As Alito wrote, the lower court based its decision on the belief that the suing parties would succeed in showing that the Trump administration violated the Administrative Procedure Act when issuing the funding freeze. But after issuing the TRO, Alito wrote, “the District Judge grew frustrated with the pace at which funds were being disbursed.” So, less than two weeks after issuing the TRO, Ali issued a second order demanding the federal government pay out about $2 billion, brushing “aside the Government’s argument that sovereign immunity barred this enforcement order,” Alito wrote.
Ali also took two steps to ensure his order could not be stopped by higher courts, Alito wrote.
“First, he labeled the order as a non-appealable TRO, and second, he demanded that the money be paid within 36 hours.”
These steps meant the Trump administration had little time to prepare an argument against what it saw as a lawless order, Alito said, but moved for a stay pending appeal. But when the administration appealed, the U.S. States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia accepted the lower court’s onerous limitations and denied the appeal, bringing it to the Supreme Court.
“At the last moment, The Chief Justice issued an administrative stay,” Alito wrote. “Unfortunately, a majority has now undone that stay. As a result, the Government must apparently pay the $2 billion posthaste – not because the law requires it, but simply because a District Judge so ordered.”
“As the Nation’s highest court, we have a duty to ensure that the power entrusted to federal judges by the Constitution is not abused,” he continued. “Today, the Court fails to carry out that responsibility.”

U.S. Supreme Court Building

Supreme Court Denies Trump Admin Request To Halt $2 Billion In Foreign Aid

Courts

Trump Administration

U.S.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio conducted a thorough review of grants and awards at the State Department and USAID that has resulted in $60 billion in savings for taxpayers, a source within the Department tells The Daily Wire.
“The State Department evaluated over 9,100 grants worth over $15.9 billion,” an internal government document obtained by The Daily Wire reads. “At the conclusion of an exhaustive review led by career FSOs and reviewed by senior political leadership, including the Secretary, over 4,100 grants worth nearly $4.4 billion were identified for elimination — a 28 percent reduction in total grant value over the course of the 15-day review.”
More than 6,000 multi-year awards were reviewed within USAID that had more than $58 billion left in value waiting to be paid out.
“At the conclusion of a process led by USAID leadership, including tranches personally reviewed by the Secretary, nearly 5,800 awards with $54 billion in value remaining were identified for elimination — a 92 percent reduction,” the document added.
The cuts came after a 90-day review of foreign assistance at the Department and USAID led by Rubio that aimed to gut wasteful spending within the government.
However, despite objections from the political Left and the media, not all programs were cut from USAID.
The secretary retained programs critical to protecting U.S. interests overseas, including food assistance; life-saving medical treatments for HIV, TB, and malaria; and critical support for nations like Lebanon, Haiti, Venezuela, Cuba, and others.
The Department now plans to work directly with Congress to reform how the United States delivers foreign assistance.
The effort will balance genuine humanitarian relief with the need to use taxpayer dollars wisely to advance American interests at home and abroad.
All spending will be run through a filter that asks if it makes America “safer,” “stronger,” and “more prosperous.”

TOPSHOT-SAUDI-US-RUSSIA-UKRAINE-CONFLICT-POLITICS-DIPLOMACY

Rubio Cuts $60+ Billion In Waste From State Department, USAID

The now-shuttered U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) paid Ukrainian models and designers to go to Paris Fashion Week and other frivolous luxuries, Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) said Wednesday.
Ernst revealed that USAID did not report the expenditures in public databases and tried to block her staff from seeing them, claiming they were classified. In reality, she said, they were not classified, merely embarrassing for how wasteful they were.
Ukraine&#8217;s leader Volodymyr Zelensky has demanded billions from American taxpayers, raising the specter of gruesome deaths and suffering. But &#8220;staff learned that the aid intended to alleviate economic distress in the war-torn nation was spent on such frivolous activities as sending Ukrainian models and designers on junkets to New York City, London Fashion Week, Paris Fashion Week, and South by Southwest in Austin, Texas,&#8221; a memo obtained by The Daily Wire said.
Ukrainian recipients of &#8220;Competitive Economy Program (CEP)&#8221; funds included, the memo said:
• A modern women’s attire company ($150,000) 
• A trade mission for a fashion design house ($128,000) 
• A photographer for fashion design publications ($126,000) 
• A purveyor of contemporary knitwear ($161,000) 
• A luxury bridal brand ($84,000) 
• Marketplace for designer artisanal pieces inspired by folk crafts ($84,000)
Money going to Ukraine also went to a vineyard ($89,000), an &#8220;artisanal fruit tea company&#8221; ($104,000), a &#8220;custom carpet manufacturer&#8221; ($2 million), a confectionary company ($678,000), a dog collar manufacturer, and a designer of upscale furniture.
Ernst said that for years, USIAD had treated her efforts at congressional oversight with open hostility. She <a href="https://www.ernst.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/senator_ernst_letter_to_secretary_rubio.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">wrote</a> to Secretary of State Marco Rubio this month that the agency &#8220;has engaged in a demonstrated pattern of obstructionism&#8221; in which they refused to say how they were spending money. When they begrudgingly let congressional overseers see their finances, bureaucrats watched the investigators and not only barred them from copying the records, but even restricted their note-taking.
Ernst, the chair of the Senate Small Business Committee, said USAID would only allow her staff to review documents &#8220;in a sensitive compartmented information facility (SCIF) at USAID headquarters. These requirements were all presented to my staff under the false pretense that this data was classified.&#8221;
&#8220;From my staff’s review of the data on USAID assistance to businesses in Ukraine thus far, it seems clear why USAID is trying to withhold information from Congress. Based on the in-camera review, it appears that over 5,000 Ukrainian businesses received U.S. taxpayer funded assistance through the Competitive Economy Program (CEP), Investment for Business Resilience (IBR), Credit for Agricultural Producers (CAP), and Agriculture Growing Rural Opportunities (AGRO) programs with awards of up to $2 million each.&#8221;
She found that USAID was also allowing NGOs to keep more than 25% of grants for themselves, to pay for &#8220;indirect costs&#8221; such as office rent, and that it claimed it would be against the law for it to provide her information necessary to evaluate whether that was appropriate.
Zelensky is <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/zelensky-to-visit-white-house-to-sign-new-mineral-deal-with-u-s">set to visit</a> the White House Friday to sign a new mineral deal with the United States.

Ukraine President Zelensky

USAID Secretly Funded Luxuries For Ukrainian Models, Senate Probe Finds

Joni Ernst

Ukraine

Stonewall UK, the LGBTQ+ charity which has been at the forefront to normalize trans-identifying people, may be cutting their staffing by a whopping 50% — and <a href="https://hotair.com/david-strom/2025/02/24/stonewall-uks-largest-trans-rights-organization-turned-out-to-be-a-usaid-front-n3800132" target="_blank" rel="noopener">one prime reason</a> may be the USAID cuts initiated by the Trump administration.
Stonewall UK actually believes children as young as two years old “recognize their trans identity.” The charity wrote in 2022, “Research suggests that children as young as 2 recognise their trans identity. Yet, many nurseries and schools teach a binary understanding of pre-assigned gender.  LGBTQ-inclusive and affirming education is crucial for the wellbeing of all young people!”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Research suggests that children as young as 2 recognise their trans identity. Yet, many nurseries and schools teach a binary understanding of pre-assigned gender.
LGBTQ-inclusive and affirming education is crucial for the wellbeing of all young people! 🌈<a href="https://t.co/RKDwnzZMfe">https://t.co/RKDwnzZMfe</a>
&mdash; Stonewall (@stonewalluk) <a href="https://twitter.com/stonewalluk/status/1550427949819695104?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 22, 2022</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
“Workers at the LGBTQ+ charity were told on Thursday that restructuring would take place, and that only roles with dedicated funding would be safe,” The Times reported. “Simon Blake, the chief executive of Stonewall, made the announcement in an office-wide Teams call, which was said to have left its 114 staff ‘shellshocked.’”
“Funding from the US came to Stonewall through the Global Equality Fund (GEF), administered by the US state department, which has given the charity more than half a million pounds in the past three years,” The Times continued. “In recent years the GEF has been Stonewall’s largest funder. Charity accounts show the GEF increased its funding for Stonewall year on year, handing over £137,254 in 2021-22, rising to £204,442 in 2022-23 and reaching £233,583 in the most recent set of accounts.&#8221;
In February 2024, the Telegraph <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/26/stonewall-funded-church-of-england-trans-guide/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a> that Stonewall funded Church of England guidance that stated children as young as five could be transgender. The LBGT group donated a grant to the Church funding two editions of the Valuing All God’s Children report. “Valuing All God’s Children tells the 4,630 Church of England schools across the country that primary schoolers should be &#8216;at liberty to explore the possibilities of who they might be without judgment or derision,'&#8221; the Telegraph noted. “The Rt Rev Jonathan Frost, the Bishop of Portsmouth, has now admitted in a written response to a question submitted to Synod that Stonewall funded the report’s second and current third editions, published in 2017 and 2019, respectively.”
“Activist groups should not be enabled by any education providers to push their political agendas in schools,” Tory MP Miriam Cates stated. “Taking money in return for allowing Stonewall to essentially dictate the Church of England’s policy is a complete failure by those in authority. This guidance should be withdrawn as a matter of urgency and replaced with new rules that put the safeguarding of children first.”

Menu