Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Business

Trump’s dismantling of USAID is his biggest blow against the Deep State yet

Published

8 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Frank Wright

Elon Musk’s DOGE has shut down USAID, immediately ceasing U.S. government funding of NGOs backing digital tyranny, mass migration, the ‘LGBTQ’ agenda, abortion – and a host of ‘regime change’ operations.

Donald Trump’s new administration has begun to dismantle globalist network funding of the policies of social revolution across the West – and beyond. With the revelations on the shuttering of USAID, Americans now know whose money is behind the Deep State: theirs. 

Trump’s war on the Deep State has shocked the establishment. Elon Musk’s DOGE has shut down  USAID, immediately ceasing U.S. government funding of NGOs backing digital tyranny, mass migration, the “LGBTQ” agenda, abortion – and a host of “regime change” operations including the funding of the origins of COVID-19 and the impeachment of Donald Trump himself.  

These projects, and many more, were all paid for with U.S. taxpayer’s money through USAID. 

This Deep State network of finance, influence and the subversion of democracy in the U.S., Britain, Europe and beyond remained unchanged in every election – until this one.  

USAID, The U.S. Agency for International Development, “disbursed over 72 billion dollars last year,” according to a Newsweek report in October 2024, which described the now-defunct agency as “by far the world’s largest provider of humanitarian aid.” 

So where is this “aid” going? 

 

… and what sort of “humanitarian” projects has it been aiding? 

“USAID is notorious for funding the most horrifying projects known to mankind,” as Mike Benz explains.   

USAID’s “humanitarian” work included funding and directing the template for global digital governance in Ukraine, with its DIIA app, and funding the World Economic Forum which promotes the same agenda:  

Its humanitarian efforts extended to sponsoring anti-Catholic propaganda in Ireland: 

 

As Glenn Beck has pointed out, USAID was a major sponsor of abortion:  

Here is a picture of ISIS terrorists in Syria in a USAID tent:

USAID was also funding “globalist propaganda” on the U.K.’s state broadcaster:

Independent journalist Michael Shellenberger reported, “From 2004-2022, USAID was the largest U.S. government funder of EcoHealth Alliance, the group that funded the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), which likely started the COVID pandemic.” 

 

USAID sought to undermine and overthrow traditional and conservative national governments in Eastern Europe – and replace them with liberal-globalist ones:  

 

Dmitry Arestovich, the former right-hand man to Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky, now says USAID pressured the Ukrainian President into the war: 

 

USAID funded “sterilization projects” in Peru: 

 

And as LifeSiteNews reported in December 2024, USAID pressured African nations to change pro-life laws and promote mass abortions, but that did not stop Fr. James Martin from bewailing its demise. 

 

USAID also paid “race rioters” to engage in violent protests in Africa: 

 

At home, USAID sponsored the prosecution of U.S. citizens by “Soros-funded prosecutors”:

 

…and, as former Trump State Department staffer Mike Benz also asks, “Why did USAID pay $20 million to hit piece journalists to dig up dirt on Rudy Giuliani and use that dirt as the basis to impeach the sitting U.S. President in 2019?” 

 

USAID was also giving “millions of dollars to Bill Kristol,” arch-neocon and founder of the permanent war “Project for a New American Century.”

 

The populist leader of El Salvador Nayib Bukele summed up the happy ending for the world that is the end of USAID.  

“Most governments don’t want USAID funds flowing into their countries because they understand where much of that money actually ends up. While marketed as support for development, democracy, and human rights, the majority of these funds are funneled into opposition groups, NGOs with political agendas, and destabilizing movements.” 

He explained how only “maybe 10% of the money reaches real projects that help people in need,” adding that “there are such cases” – but the remaining ninety percent, he says, “It is used to fuel dissent, finance protests, and undermine administrations that refuse to align with the globalist agenda. Cutting this so-called aid isn’t just beneficial for the United States; it’s also a big win for the rest of the world.” 

Donald Trump’s war on the Deep State has just begun. It is not merely concerned with saving America, but his “common sense revolution” is a cure for a world made sick by a global network of death, deception and digital tyranny. He is uprooting the hidden international system which has promoted “LGBT, open borders and war” – as Hungary’s Viktor Orbán defined the values of the former regime. 

This has been described as a “counter-revolution” by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, who says these are serious moves against the “Deep State… and its mirror image, the Deep Church.”

With a serious campaign underway to destroy the business model of the globalist system it is hard to see how the rainbow “church” of Fr. James Martin can survive its isolation in a world without the patronage, propaganda and power of a corrupt Deep State and its globalist networks. 

And the revolution does not stop with USAID. With moves to “purge” the FBI, audit the U.S. Treasury and all the agencies of the U.S. government, Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency is set to undertake a thorough cleanup of the White House and all it commands.  

You might say the swamp is being drained. 

However you frame it, what is happening here has never been seen in our lifetimes.  

The secret state which directed politics and policy in the West despite elections is being exposed, defunded and shut down. We may not only have meaningful elections in future, but a Western society free of the propaganda of social revolution whose toxic “new values” had one thing in mind: the replacement of Christian civilization with a global government no one could ever escape.  

Finally, after decades of destruction by design, things have really changed. For good. 

Business

Trump Reportedly Shuts Off Flow Of Taxpayer Dollars Into World Trade Organization

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Thomas English

The Trump administration has reportedly suspended financial contributions to the World Trade Organization (WTO) as of Thursday.

The decision comes as part of a broader shift by President Donald Trump to distance the U.S. from international institutions perceived to undermine American sovereignty or misallocate taxpayer dollars. U.S. funding for both 2024 and 2025 has been halted, amounting to roughly 11% of the WTO’s annual operating budget, with the organization’s total 2024 budget amounting to roughly $232 million, according to Reuters.

“Why is it that China, for decades, and with a population much bigger than ours, is paying a tiny fraction of [dollars] to The World Health Organization, The United Nations and, worst of all, The World Trade Organization, where they are considered a so-called ‘developing country’ and are therefore given massive advantages over The United States, and everyone else?” Trump wrote in May 2020.

The president has long criticized the WTO for what he sees as judicial overreach and systemic bias against the U.S. in trade disputes. Trump previously paralyzed the organization’s top appeals body in 2019 by blocking judicial appointments, rendering the WTO’s core dispute resolution mechanism largely inoperative.

But a major sticking point continues to be China’s continued classification as a “developing country” at the WTO — a designation that entitles Beijing to a host of special trade and financial privileges. Despite being the world’s second-largest economy, China receives extended compliance timelines, reduced dues and billions in World Bank loans usually reserved for poorer nations.

The Wilson Center, an international affairs-oriented think tank, previously slammed the status as an outdated loophole benefitting an economic superpower at the expense of developed democracies. The Trump administration echoed this criticism behind closed doors during WTO budget meetings in early March, according to Reuters.

The U.S. is reportedly not withdrawing from the WTO outright, but the funding freeze is likely to trigger diplomatic and economic groaning. WTO rules allow for punitive measures against non-paying member states, though the body’s weakened legal apparatus may limit enforcement capacity.

Trump has already withdrawn from the World Health Organization, slashed funds to the United Nations and signaled a potential exit from other global bodies he deems “unfair” to U.S. interests.

Continue Reading

Alberta

Albertans have contributed $53.6 billion to the retirement of Canadians in other provinces

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill and Nathaniel Li

Albertans contributed $53.6 billion more to CPP then retirees in Alberta received from it from 1981 to 2022

Albertans’ net contribution to the Canada Pension Plan —meaning the amount Albertans paid into the program over and above what retirees in Alberta
received in CPP payments—was more than six times as much as any other province at $53.6 billion from 1981 to 2022, finds a new report published today by the Fraser Institute, an independent, non-partisan Canadian public policy think-tank.

“Albertan workers have been helping to fund the retirement of Canadians from coast to coast for decades, and Canadians ought to know that without Alberta, the Canada Pension Plan would look much different,” said Tegan Hill, director of Alberta policy at the Fraser Institute and co-author of Understanding Alberta’s Role in National Programs, Including the Canada Pension Plan.

From 1981 to 2022, Alberta workers contributed 14.4 per cent (on average) of the total CPP premiums paid—Canada’s compulsory, government- operated retirement pension plan—while retirees in the province received only 10.0 per cent of the payments. Alberta’s net contribution over that period was $53.6 billion.

Crucially, only residents in two provinces—Alberta and British Columbia—paid more into the CPP than retirees in those provinces received in benefits, and Alberta’s contribution was six times greater than BC’s.

The reason Albertans have paid such an outsized contribution to federal and national programs, including the CPP, in recent years is because of the province’s relatively high rates of employment, higher average incomes, and younger population.

As such, if Alberta withdrew from the CPP, Alberta workers could expect to receive the same retirement benefits but at a lower cost (i.e. lower payroll tax) than other Canadians, while the payroll tax would likely have to increase for the rest of the country (excluding Quebec) to maintain the same benefits.

“Given current demographic projections, immigration patterns, and Alberta’s long history of leading the provinces in economic growth, Albertan workers will likely continue to pay more into it than Albertan retirees get back from it,” Hill said.

Understanding Alberta’s Role in National Programs, Including the Canada Pension Plan

  • Understanding Alberta’s role in national income transfers and other important programs is crucial to informing the broader debate around Alberta’s possible withdrawal from the Canada Pension Plan (CPP).
  • Due to Alberta’s relatively high rates of employment, higher average incomes, and younger population, Albertans contribute significantly more to federal revenues than they receive back in federal spending.
  • From 1981 to 2022, Alberta workers contributed 14.4 percent (on average) of the total CPP premiums paid while retirees in the province received only 10.0 percent of the payments. Albertans net contribution was $53.6 billion over the period—approximately six times greater than British Columbia’s net contribution (the only other net contributor).
  • Given current demographic projections, immigration patterns, and Alberta’s long history of leading the provinces in economic growth and income levels, Alberta’s central role in funding national programs is unlikely to change in the foreseeable future.
  • Due to Albertans’ disproportionate net contribution to the CPP, the current base CPP contribution rate would likely have to increase to remain sustainable if Alberta withdrew from the plan. Similarly, Alberta’s stand-alone rate would be lower than the current CPP rate.

 

Tegan Hill

Director, Alberta Policy, Fraser Institute

Nathaniel Li

Senior Economist, Fraser Institute
Continue Reading

Trending

X