Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Interview with Romanian Investigative Journalist, Iosefina Pascal

“People’s trust in public institutions has been destroyed”

Hungarian Conservative | February 15, 2025

Romania has been in a political crisis since the presidential elections were suspended at the end of last year. So far, the Constitutional Court of Romania has not presented any evidence to justify the act. Why do you think the elections were actually suspended?

Romania is in a deep political, social, and economic crisis. The causes are manifold, but the chaos was installed when the presidential elections were cancelled while the people were voting. Without a shred of evidence.

The people’s trust in public institutions has been destroyed. People lost faith in the justice system, which should have sanctioned this undemocratic decision. All of this destabilizes the country and serves hostile interests. In other words, both the so-called ‘judges’ of the Constitutional Court of Romania and the director of this coup, Klaus Iohannis, have served foreign interests rather than the national interest.

They cancelled the elections because none of the candidates from the governing coalition made it to the second round, as was indicated by most polls. They cancelled the elections because they realized that Romanians voted against this coalition, against the political establishment blindly subservient to the EU. They cancelled the elections because they wanted to set an example with Romania for the other EU states so they would not choose the ‘wrong candidate’.

Q: Do you think they will let Georgescu run again? If so, it wouldn’t make sense since who would let a candidate run again who supposedly, according to the Constitutional Court of your country, has had foreign interference?

Given the latest actions, described by some lawyers and analysts as political persecution launched against the collaborators and supporters of Călin Georgescu, it is clear that now they are trying to ‘produce’ evidence to justify the cancellation of the elections and the prohibition of Călin Georgescu’s candidacy.

Considering that I have proven in my investigations that several so-called judges of the Constitutional Court of Romania have worked for NGOs funded by Soros, anything is possible.

Given the people’s absolutely low trust level in the judicial system and public institutions, any scenario in which Georgescu is banned, arrested, or harassed with criminal investigations would only paint him as a martyr.

A scenario in which Călin Georgescu would not be allowed to run in the presidential elections would be an explosive one, again giving other countries the platform to ban candidates and parties simply because they pose a threat to the positions and businesses of the globalist political establishment.

Q: Iohannis resigned this week. Why do you think he did it now and not when it was his turn, or why didn’t he wait until the May elections?

Given the sudden disappearance of intelligence agency reports of alleged ‘foreign interference’ and ‘cyber attacks’ after the abrupt resignation of illegitimate President Klaus Iohannis, I am considering two options.

First, he resigned now because he needed time to actually hide those reports on which the illegal annulment of the elections was based. This was to prevent them from falling into the hands of the future President elected by the people and exposing his strategy of cancelling 9 million votes in December.

Second, he resigned now because he was about to be removed through a parliamentary procedure that was due to be approved on the day of his resignation, which would have meant he would lose all the financial benefits that a former president has, according to Romanian law.

In fact, both scenarios could be valid simultaneously.

Q: Do you think the Constitutional Court will reverse its decision and return to the second round that should have happened in the country?

Regardless of who else resigns, be it the Prime Minister or even the judges of the Constitutional Court, people need answers, and, more importantly, they want the second round of the elections to resume.

Technically and legally speaking, the Constitutional Court can reverse its own decision; it did so when it decided to annul the presidential elections, reversing its previous decision, which validated the first round of the elections. Will they do it? I don’t know. These judges have skeletons in their closets, as I said, and have total contempt for the people; Klaus Iohannis decorated them, interestingly enough, the day before he resigned. The conclusion is that they have been ‘rewarded’ for the chaos into which they have plunged Romania.

Q: In the last weeks you have been investigating the USAID scandal, which has affected Central and Eastern Europe and Romania. What did you find regarding Romania?

I’ve uncovered an extensive and well-coordinated network of so-called ‘independent’ NGOs and publications. This network had the same funding and the same goal. We’re talking about hundreds of millions of euros directly and illegally allocated by the European Commission and hundreds of millions of dollars in funding from USAID.

As for the European funding, this took the form of grants from the EU directly from taxpayers’ money to NGOs, mainstream publications and ‘independent’ publications. The goal was to promote left-wing globalist politics and to manipulate public opinion through the so-called fight against disinformation, especially during election campaigns, promoting gender ideology, combating any national and conservative values, and labelling conservative parties, journalists, publications, and activists as ‘Russia’s people’. The EU had developed a complex funding mechanism for these entities, which completely lacked transparency and operated under the cover of excessive bureaucracy. Therefore, my work to expose these matters in detail was titanic.

As for the entities funded by USAID, here we’re talking about a network consisting of several large NGOs that funded smaller NGOs with the same goals, including campaigning against sovereignist leaders like Trump, Orban, Georgescu, etc.

Q: In the course of these investigations, you have also looked at what the European Union does with its funds and found many subsidies to NGOs, journalists, international news agencies… What is the biggest scandal you have discovered?

The most serious case so far is that of the secret contract signed by Ursula von der Leyen, similar to the secret Pfizer contract, through which the European Commission awarded 130 million euros to a French advertising agency (involved in a corruption criminal case along with Emmanuel Macron) before the 2024 European Parliament elections. This French advertising agency was also involved in the 2019 campaign.

The 130 million euros it received were distributed to major media outlets and NGOs to promote the work of European bureaucrats in a favourable light and, more importantly, to stop any criticism and negative information about the EU.

In short, we have the first proof that we can no longer talk about independent media in the EU but about media mercenaries who run pieces for the highest bidder. And we are the ones who have been unknowingly funding these media mercenaries.

Iosefina Pascal is a 32-year-old, conservative Romanian investigative journalist. She works tirelessly and independently to get information in her country that the institutional media are keeping quiet. She started working as an independent online journalist in 2018 when the Soros-backed protests shook her country. Since 2020 she has been collaborating with various Romanian TV and radio stations.

March 1, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Corruption | , , | Leave a comment

Ukraine: A Deep State Tool to Destroy Trump?

By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 26.02.2025

The Ukrainian political class is not just badmouthing US President Donald Trump – it has actively worked to undermine his presidency on behalf of the Democrats since his first term, Hans Mahncke, a US investigative journalist and lawyer, tells Sputnik.

Ukraine as a Deep State Tool

  • In 2016, top Ukrainian officials publicly insulted then presidential candidate Trump as a “dangerous misfit.”
  • Ukrainian operatives dug up dirt on Trump concerning his alleged ties to Russia and leaked a fabricated ledger to undermine his campaign manager, Paul Manafort.
  • Former security chief Valentyn Nalyvaichenko admitted Kiev interfered in the 2016 US election.
  • In 2019, Democrats weaponized Ukraine again to impeach Trump, with US officials of Ukrainian origin Eugene and Alexander Vindman playing a prominent role.

The Trump-Russia collusion hoax, “deflected attention from Ukraine’s 2016 election meddling…, Biden’s role in pressuring Ukraine to fire a prosecutor investigating Burisma, Biden’s role in the 2014 Maidan coup, and from broader US involvement in post-2014 Ukrainian politics,” Mahncke says.

“Russiagate also sabotaged Trump’s ability to reset relations with Russia… maintaining the rigid narrative of Ukraine as the virtuous ally and Russia as the ultimate villain,” the journalist underscores.

Two Birds With One Stone: Why Patel’s Ukraine Probe Could Bust the Deep State

“A real investigation into Ukraine wouldn’t just expose corruption there — it would strike at the heart of the Washington, DC, establishment,” Mahncke says, commenting on new FBI Director Kash Patel’s bid to scrutinize the Kiev regime.

Mahncke explains that Ukraine has long been a hub for money laundering, foreign influence, and off-the-books deals.

While many potential crimes linked to Ukraine may now fall outside the statute of limitations, fraudulent USAID payments and bribery schemes remain well within the window for prosecution, according to the lawyer.

“USAID funds, NGO cash flows, and military aid kickbacks have enriched the same elites who pushed the Maidan coup and later worked to destroy Trump. If Patel follows the money, it will lead straight back to Washington,” the journalist highlights.

What’s Behind Trump’s Dizzying Speed in Exposing Deep State Fraud?

“The deep state will strike back — no question. Right now, it seems to be in disarray, but there will be some kind of lashing out; we just don’t know what yet. What’s certain is that it’s coming. That’s why Trump must move fast — and he knows it,” Mahncke notes.

Team Trump’s remarkable speed in exposing the USAID scandal and other instances of internal fraud “comes from knowing exactly what they’re up against” and “where the bodies are buried” after years of deep state attacks against him, the journalist points out.

“A key ally in this fight is Elon Musk — a no-nonsense, brilliant businessman who cuts to the chase. From the Twitter Files to fighting censorship, he’s made it harder for the deep state to control the narrative,” Mahncke concludes.

February 26, 2025 Posted by | Corruption, Deception | , , , | 1 Comment

USAID – AusAID: Same playbook different actors

By Alan Moran | Regulatory Review | February 18, 2025

Donald Trump tweeted “Looks like billions of dollars have been stolen at USAID and other agencies much of it going to the fake news media as a payoff for creating good stories about the Democrats”. Revelations about corruption in the USAID beg questions about the integrity of Australia’s aid programs.

There are long-standing questions dating back to the Clinton days and before the Rudd ALP Government.

The Clintons are estimated to be worth between $120 million and $240 million having been in debt by $16 million when Bill left office in January 2001. According to the newsagency, Associated Press, 85 private sector stakeholders, which is more than half of the non-government people who met with Hillary Clinton while she was secretary of state, gave money — either personally or through companies or groups — to the Clinton Foundation. This amounted to $156 million. In addition, Clinton met with representatives of at least 16 foreign governments that donated as much as $170 million to the Clinton charity. Australia was among these governments.

According to Grok, in:

  • February 2006: $25 million was donated to the Clinton Foundation by Foreign Minister Alexander Downer
  • October 2006: Another 15 million was given for HIV/AIDS initiatives by the Clinton Foundation
  • April 1 2008 – September 5 2008: Under Prime Minister Kevin Rudd $10 million was donated to the Clinton Foundation
  • September 2012: Under Prime Minister Julia Gillard $14 million was donated while Hillary Clinton was the US Secretary of State. Gillard later Chaired the Foundation’s Global Partnership for Education
  • September 22 2014: Foreign Minister Julie Bishop announced a commitment of $88 million over five years to the Clinton Health Access Initiative, a sister organisation to the Clinton Foundation

Miranda Devine reported, “The Abbott government topped up the left-wing organisation’s coffers with another $140 million in 2014, bringing total Australian largesse to $460 million, according to a press release from Foreign Minister Julie Bishop. The funding ceased in 2016, when Trump assumed office.

Section 70.2 of the Commonwealth Criminal Code Act 1995 makes it illegal for Australian individuals or companies to bribe foreign officials. Apparently, the law does not extend to Australian officials and politicians!

AusAID (which Tony Abbott located within DFAT in 2013) follows a similar playbook to USAID. Thus:

  • The Office of Development Assistance (ODA) investments valued at $3 million and above must have a gender equality objective.
  • DFAT has a $3.5 million Inclusion and Equality Fund to support LGBTQIA+ organisations to catalyse change in their communities.
  • ODA spent $619 million (15 per cent of its budget) on climate related issues in 2022/23. It is not clear that grants to NGOs pressing climate issues are included.

Other Australian agencies are also involved in foreign expenditures. These include considerable funding for activities associated with climate change under the IPCC and the biennial Conference of Parties in which Foreign Affairs participate (as do CSIRO, BoM, Industry, Agriculture and others). These activities will surely soon be fully recognised as the gross destructive squandering of resources that they always were.

The Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute (GCCSI) was initially launched in 2008 by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd who committed up to $100 million annually as part of his aim to make Australia a global leader in CCS technology. Over 15 years of total failure has not daunted its subsidy-seekers’ zeal.

More recently, the Quad Clean Energy Supply Chain Diversification Program, a spin-off from the diplomatic partnership between Australia, India, Japan and the United States, has a $50 million budget administered by “Business Australia”. Round 1, which closed on February 10, provides up to $2.5 million in funding for Australian and Indo-Pacific joint applications for studies to develop and diversify clean energy supply chains in the Indo-Pacific region. Such a scheme would not find support from President Trump but will program inertia allow it to survive the changed US agenda?

If Australia is ever to get the Trumpian leadership it needs, such programs will have to be excised, perhaps by using techniques, pioneered by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), involving freezing bank accounts.

February 23, 2025 Posted by | Corruption, Deception | , , , | Leave a comment

EU’s “Democracy Shield” faces backlash over sovereignty concerns, double standards, and proposed intelligence agency

Opponents argue the initiative is a tool for political gatekeeping, not just election integrity

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | February 22, 2025

The EU’s “Democracy Shield,” is presented as a way to strengthen information integrity online, especially in the context of elections – but which opponents believe is another way for the bloc’s bureaucracy to tighten the screws on tech giants, speech-wise – is facing vocal opposition in the European Parliament (EP).

The initiative’s first monthly meeting heard criticism in particular from MEPs that come from conservative and sovereignty parties, who wanted to know what exactly qualifies as “foreign interference in elections” – and why the double standard in the way social media content is treated compared to legacy, corporate media.

Namely, while the latter, in Europe at least almost without exception aligned with those in power, is free to publish any opinion, including those that are biased and could be reasonably expected to impact the outcome of an election, social media accounts get banned, while platforms are forced to change algorithms to limit the reach of any content branded as “foreign interference.”

To this point, some MEPs asked if only Russia is to be considered as a possible “election meddler” – or if other countries, the US included, can play the same role in some scenarios – and, that could be true of the EU itself.

According to European Conservative, MEP Fidias Panayiotou gave an example: “In my country, Cyprus, in 2004, through USAID, the US spent $60 million on the referendum for reunification.”

The main topic of the meeting is the now long-contested presidential election in Romania, where the “surprise” victory of Calin Georgescu got annulled as Brussels went all-in trying to make sure he is not eventually elected (that crisis is ongoing.)

The fact that Georgescu is not to the establishment’s liking, caused him to be labeled “pro-Russian” and, “ultra-nationalist” – while his use of social platforms to get the message across was condemned as some sort of “foreign interference.”

But “Democracy Shield’s” opponents are warning that – yet again – there is an attempt to misuse the term “disinformation” to undermine people’s, and country’s rights, namely their sovereignty.

In the context of elections, sovereignty is further threatened by initiatives such as setting up a new EU intelligence agency – that critics say may result in even more “centralization of electoral control in the hands of EU institutions.”

February 22, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Corruption, Progressive Hypocrite, Russophobia | , , | Leave a comment

Is It Foreign Aid or Covert Action?

By Philip Giraldi • Unz Review • February 21, 2025

There has been considerable controversy surrounding the Trump administration decision to cutback on government agencies that are ostensibly committed to charitable, educational and other nation building activities both overseas and in the United States. This spending, amounting to scores of billions of dollars, has helped produce budget deficits that ballooned in the twenty-first century, largely due to the surge in overseas activity that occurred after the trauma of 9/11 when the United States decided that it had to serve as policeman for the rest of the world to make itself safe. As the US is now verging on bankruptcy due to its unsustainable debts, the second incarnation of the Trump Administration has focused on cutting budgets in areas that it considers to be enemy occupied, often meaning “woke” or institutionally allied to the Democrats. Social programs as well as the bloated defense department spending were considered to be suitable targets so starting during the first week in February, the White House brought down the hammer when it went after a number of government agencies, inter alia calling for huge cuts in Pentagon spending and the complete elimination of the Education Department.

The White House also shut down the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), firing nearly all of its 10,000 employees, reportedly leaving only little more than 600 employees in place to assist in the shutting down or downsizing of facilities in the US and in foreign countries. Also, about 800 awards and contracts that are administered through USAID were reportedly being canceled. There have reportedly been some judicial delays in the firings due to the complexity of removing thousands of employees and families from overseas offices and housing, though the pause is likely to be only temporary.

Tax dollars are traditionally used corruptly to fund projects and policies dear to the hearts of politicians, which is why Ron Paul and others have called for sweeping audits, including of the Federal Reserve system and the Pentagon in particular. This hidden spending is particularly difficult to identify if the program is somehow linked to foreign policy and/or national security, which have traditionally been protected from scrutiny by denying nearly all public access to sensitive information based on the “need to know” principle to safeguard sources and vulnerable activities.

USAID was founded in 1961 during the John F. Kennedy administration to unite several foreign assistance organizations and programs under one agency. At first it was seriously intended to be a mechanism for the US to aid in health, disaster relief, socioeconomic development, environmental protection, democratic governance and education. Its focus, however, eventually became to guide development in parts of the world that suffered from what were considered to be dysfunctional governments and institutions in terms of American interests. USAID has always been funded by the federal government and its upper management has worked closely with the Department of State, to which it is technically accountable, and the intelligence agencies in particular. Its budget in 2023 was $43 billion. Trump’s reduction in force (RIF) of USAID has been accompanied by a shake-up in its management, its remaining responsibilities now being in the hands of the Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who has considerable experience in special agency management after having served on the Board of the National Endowment for Democracy’s (NED) Republican subsidiary component, the International Republican Institute (IRI). NED, which operates extensively overseas, has also been stripped of funding by Trump.

The dismantling of USAID does not necessarily mean the organization will completely go away, it will just be much reduced and under new management. It will likely have a new mission, though no one is at this point sure what that will mean. And USAID and NED are not alone as the presidential memo has called for a halt to the funding of all the government components that are dependent on taxpayer generated funds to provide what is perhaps euphemistically referred to as “foreign aid.” USAID and NED do have humanitarian projects, i.e. feeding the hungry, but they are primarily politically driven. The NED component IRI puts it this way on its website “Our mission at IRI—advancing democracy worldwide—is a battle with many fronts. I am proud to say that IRI is supportive of every endeavor that will bring freedom to more people. We have made progress in our mission by giving hope to those who wish to protest on a city street, run for office, or cast a ballot.”

So the aid organizations overtly have a political role, but how does it translate in practice and does it extend to playing favorites with the US media and political parties? Trump has put it another way, declaring that USAID leaders were “radical left lunatics.” This is what he claims on his website Truth Social:

“LOOKS LIKE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS HAVE BEEN STOLEN AT USAID, AND OTHER AGENCIES, MUCH OF IT GOING TO THE FAKE NEWS MEDIA AS A ‘PAYOFF’ FOR CREATING GOOD STORIES ABOUT THE DEMOCRATS. THE LEFT WING ‘RAG,’ KNOWN AS ‘POLITICO,’ SEEMS TO HAVE RECEIVED $8,000,000. Did the New York Times receive money??? Who else did??? THIS COULD BE THE BIGGEST SCANDAL OF THEM ALL, PERHAPS THE BIGGEST IN HISTORY! THE DEMOCRATS CAN’T HIDE FROM THIS ONE. TOO BIG, TOO DIRTY!”

There are, in fact, credible reports that the 2019 impeachment of Trump was driven by the actions and disinformation coming from CIA, FBI and USAID operatives, so it is plausible to assume that Trump is now settling scores. Beyond that, USAID and NED are both notorious for their roles in the business of covertly supporting opposition political parties worldwide and assisting in regime change. Billionaire philanthropist George Soros, through his network of organizations, received $260 milllion from USAID for funneling funds to non-governmental-organizations (NGOs) connected with Soros’ Open Society Foundations, which are known for advocating for radical policies and regime changes globally. Soros is also a Democratic Party favorite and major fund raiser, having recently received at a White House ceremony the honor of the Presidential Medal of Freedom presented in absentia to his son Alex from outgoing President Joe Biden.

As a result, both USAID and NED have been banned from foreign countries, including Russia, due to their meddling in local politics. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who was often a target of USAID activity, immediately thanked Trump for his decision to cancel USAID. Both USAID and NED were deeply involved in Eastern Europe. Former Acting Deputy Secretary of State Victoria Nuland has revealed that the aid agencies were deeply engaged in the multiple source $5 billion dollar multiyear US “investment” in Ukraine that culminated in regime change in 2013 and led to the current war with Russia. In government circles it has frequently been asserted that USAID and NED and other such organizations now do what the CIA used to do routinely in terms of regime change between its founding and the 1990s.

One might suggest that recent US governments, operating through their various subsidiaries like USAID and NED have been funding just about everything to control a world community in line with American interests. Mainstream media worldwide that is directly or indirectly funded reportedly includes journalists, news outlets, and activist NGOs and sites – and that’s just through USAID. That would appear to include Reuters, Associated Press, BBC, The Guardian, NBC, CNN, NPR, NYT, Politico, PBS, The Financial Times, The Atlantic, The Daily Telegraph, as well as much more media in the developing world. The anti-China hysteria media “ecosystem” currently depends on US government funding, and is already complaining about the impending shutdown of USAID support. To cite only one example of how it is packaged, Reuters news service has received millions in funding from the US government specifically for “active social engineering.”

Labor unions are also funded by USAID which is also behind the recent political unrest in Slovakia. It has also paid for multiple coup attempts in Venezuela, funded high profile trips for Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky to improve his image and popularity, and funded al-Qaeda linked groups in Syria to successfully overthrow the government in Damascus. Going back to Trump’s first term of office, it is interesting to observe that most of the “aid” to opposition parties to overthrow Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela was delivered during 2019, so Trump, guided by hardliners John Bolton and Mike Pompeo, was not at that time shy about regime change. In fact, Voice Of America (VOA), which often served as a CIA mouthpiece, even reported that Trump had tripled aid to opposition figure Juan Guaido to $56 million. Those asking themselves why Trump has now decided to “oppose” the very semi-covert agency that he’s also been using for regime change have a point, but it might be appropriate to see the shakeup as a warning against government information, law enforcement and intelligence agencies again becoming tools of the Democratic Party politicians.

Defenders of USAID are arguing that the agency is being maligned, that in addition to its political profile it is heavily engaged in promoting health and wellness worldwide. The head of USAID under Joe Biden was the highly controversial and very much “woke” Samantha Power, who claims somewhat disingenuously that the agency budget of $38 billion in 2023 included something like $20 billion in spending that should appropriately be described as humanitarian. Those who are the recipients of the programs, mostly in the third world, will consequently suffer from the defunding of aid. If that is actually so, it perhaps would make sense to roll such programs into a mechanism that would not be tied to regime change and corruption of local governments and media.

There is some question even in Congress concerning whether there will be a new centralized aid agency and what it will be called or do now that it has been reduced in size and will likely have a tiny budget relative to what it once enjoyed. It is early days and the answer to that question will likely emerge before too long, but it should be pointed out that at no point has Rubio or anyone else in the Trump administration actually condemned aggressive US engagement abroad or claimed they will bring it to an end. The State Department has even officially said the only goal is to ensure the good things that USAID did will continue by “advancing American interests abroad.” Given some of the recent aggressive positions taken by the Trump Administration over Gaza, Panama, Canada, Mexico, Iran and Greenland as well as the tendency on the part of its top officials to increase pressure on perceived adversaries, it may be that the US isn’t changing course at all. It quite plausibly might be doubling down, and organizations like USAID and NED, even if their names, roles and leadership change, will likely be integral to that process.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org.

February 21, 2025 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Sinophobia | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Serbian president slams USAID for inciting regime change, demands journalist say how much money his outlet received

By Liz Heflin | Remix News | February 21, 2025

Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić told “Epilogue” viewers on TV Insider that U.S. President Donald Trump directly mentioned Serbia as a place where USAID wanted a regime change, reports Blic.

“Someone was only waiting for additional tragedies, meanwhile preparing different types of scenarios for some new riots and for some new attacks on the state. And that is nothing new, and it can be seen through the words of President Donald Trump. Donald Trump directly mentioned Serbia yesterday, the president of the United States of America directly mentioned Serbia as a place where they wanted a political change of government. Those who received American money to overthrow the government,” said Vučić in the Epilogue show on TV Insider.

In July of last year, the government of Serbia issued a joint statement with USAID regarding $18 million of new funds for a “development partnership,” and outlets have pointed out that the government has thanked the U.S. for such money in the past.

The July statement noted that the new “funds will be used, among other things, to improve public procurement procedures in Serbia, improve access to justice for citizens, improve environmental protection and energy security, promote a stronger media environment, improvement of economic opportunities for vulnerable groups, as well as for greater competitiveness of the Serbian economy.”

Vučić admitted during his TV interview that money has been received and used, but primarily for “senseless projects that were supposed to cover the eyes,” while the real intent of most funding was to overthrow the government. Asked about the “many videos” of himself and other officials thanking USAID for funding projects, Vučić said that “when someone gives you 1,000 euros, it is up to you to still politely say ‘thank you.’”

He then indicated that money was spent on equipping Serbian courts with various recording devices, microphones and many other things. But far larger amounts were being handed to NGOs such as Trag and CRTA.

“In the last four years, there were 400 million (dinar), of which not even 10 million went to the state. Everything went your way for the non-governmental sector,” said Vučić.

Oddly, in April of 2024, a few months before USAID’s additional $18 million was announced, Trag and CRTA jointly announced a USAID competition for grants under what they called a “Mobilization Fund program.”

“Trag Foundation and CRTA, with the financial support of the American Agency for International Development (USAID), invite you to apply for the competition for the Mobilization Fund program.”

Listed activities that could receive grants included: “local community development, human rights, anti-discrimination, women’s rights and women’s empowerment, youth empowerment, inclusion, solidarity economy, environmental protection, socio-economic development, rule of law, accountability of public institutions, fight against corruption, urbanism and public spaces and all others in which activists recognize challenges.”

Former prime minister and president of the National Assembly of Serbia Ana Brnabic has been called out as well for her gratitude in the past for USAID funds that had presumably “improved” the country. Now, with Trump in office, she is changing her tune, saying the “investigative media outlets” financed by USAID had systematically harmed Serbia, according to Tanjug.

“In the past 10-11 years, they have been implying that anyone who engages in politics is, in a way, corrupt or wants to be corrupt. That has made it impossible for the many quality people who wanted to help, or were perhaps helping from the background all the time, to get involved as state secretaries or ministers because they would, in fact, immediately be targeted by various media such as Krik,” Brnabic said on Pink TV.

Brnabic further let the cat out of the bag, noting there is no such thing as independent media, which merely implies reliance on U.S. money from special interest groups.

“You can see that those media outlets and the people working there were quite dependent. It is just that they were dependent on the American administration and, to make things worse, not on a U.S. administration elected by American citizens, but on what is referred to as the deep state,” Brnabic said.

According to Tanjug, Serbia will further investigate the spending of USAID funds if the U.S. asks.

Regarding the media portal Kric, mentioned above. President Vučić had a recent spat with one of its journalists who tried, again, to corner Vučić with supposed information on his brother at the opening of the International Tourism Fair in Belgrade.

The journalist said that Andrej Vučić’s name was brought up in recorded messages, indicating he held power over state contracts in Novi Sad and also regarding police appointments.

Vučić called the allegations “a notorious lie,” reiterated his brother holds no political office, and then turned on the journalist, asking, “I am interested in you answering the question of how much money you received from USAID, how much from NED? How much money did these two criminal organizations, both one and the other, transfer to you? How much, as the American president and one of the most famous secular, one might say, businessmen, Elon Musk, who calls these criminal organizations? How much money did they give you for this?

Making fun of the allegations from third parties, Vučić said, “Many people also write that I told them I would jump from the Smilovica lookout, but I haven’t jumped yet.” He then pointed out that, on the other hand, the funding Kric has received from the U.S. is a fact.

The journalist then accused the president of targeting journalists, again, to which Vučić replied: “How can I target you? I’m just asking how much money you received.”

The United States has reportedly given $937 million to Serbia since 2001. Although the USAID site is no longer online, a Google search still shows entries, with one for Serbia saying this money was meant for “economic and democratic development.”

February 21, 2025 Posted by | Corruption, Deception | , , , | 1 Comment

USA Is Defunding Regime-Change NGOs

Prof. Glenn Diesen on Neutrality Studies
Glenn Diesen | February 19, 2025

For the longest time, USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) have been funding foreign NGOs to influence local populations through media propaganda and the presence of a civil society consensus. Donald Trump just pulled the plug by defunding USAID and even going after the NED. This is unprecedented in modern history that a state dismantles its own cognitive warfare apparatus. What happened?

February 20, 2025 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Progressive Hypocrite, Video | , , | Leave a comment

Bill Gates and USAID: A Dangerous Alliance With Deadly Secrets

By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 19.02.2025

Bill Gates has urged the Trump administration to reconsider its stance on USAID, calling it “an unbelievable asset” and warning that cuts could risk “millions” of lives. What is the Microsoft mogul-turned billionaire ‘philanthropist’ really worried about?

USAID and the Gates Foundation have worked together for nearly 25 years on issues near and dear to Mr. Gates’ heart, from infectious diseases and vaccines to family planning, agriculture, and climate change.

Major collaborations include the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria, and the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI).

Gates has also partnered with USAID on the Global Health Initiative and the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).

If these names ring a bill, they should:

  • GAVI is running an ambitious program to vaccinate 86 million adolescent girls in developing countries against HPV with jabs including Gardasil, made by Merck, which now faces a lawsuit in the US over side effects ranging from sporadic paralysis to cancer.
  • Gates and USAID have continued supporting GAVI despite evidence from India starting in 2009 that its HPV jabs can cause severe illness or even death.
  • USAID committed over $2 billion to GAVI from 2001-2017, and $1.16 billion more between 2020-2023.
  • Leaked docs published by Revolver News in 2022 exposed a USAID scheme using pandemic funds for “reproductive health” (i.e. population control) in Africa.
  • CEPI, together with Anthony Fauci’s National Institutes of Health and the Food and Drug Administration, has been linked to controversial health schemes of its own, from a September 2019 workshop on vaccine biomarkers to partnership in Event 201, a pandemic simulation held in October 2019, just weeks before COVID hit.

Partners in Food (In)security

Gates and USAID have also touted collaborations on food security, promoting agricultural tech for smallholder farmers in developing countries, for example.

At the same time, the Gates Foundation has invested heavily in companies engaged in GMO research, from Monsanto and its infamous “terminator seed” projects to synthetic meat startups.

An exhaustive 2024 critique of Gates’ agricultural schemes in Africa by the US Right to Know public health watchdog found that his and USAID’s AGRA initiative, focused on chemical-laced monoculture farming, increased dependency and agrobusiness influence instead of reducing hunger.

In other words, Gates’ concerns about USAID’s demise seem more about losing a key ally in efforts to control development, food security, and health in developing nations than “saving lives.”

February 19, 2025 Posted by | Deception | , , | Leave a comment

How USAID Assisted the Corporate Takeover of Ukrainian Agriculture

By John Klar | Brownstone Institute | February 19, 2025

A recent essay titled “The Real Purpose of Net Zero” by Jefferey Jaxon posited that Europe’s current war against farmers in the name of preventing climate change is ultimately designed to inflict famine. Jaxon is not speculating on globalist motives; he is warning humanity of a rapidly unfolding reality that is observable in the perverse lies against cows, denigration of European farmers as enemies of the Earth, and calls by the WHO, WEF, and UN for a plant-based diet dependent entirely on GMOs, synthetic fertilizers, and agrichemicals.

Revelations about the evil doings of the Orwellian-monikered “United States Agency of International Development” (USAID) reveal a roadmap to totalitarian control unwittingly funded by America’s taxpaying proles. USAID’s clandestine machinations have long focused on controlling local and global food supplies as “soft colonization” by multinational chemical, agricultural, and financial corporations. European farmers revolting against climate, wildlife, and animal rights policies are harbingers of this tightening globalist noose.

The roots of the current globalist plan to “save humanity from climate change” link directly to the infamous Kissinger Report, which called to control world food supplies and agriculture as part of a globalist collaboration between nation-states and NGOs to advance US national security interests and “save the world” from human overpopulation using “fertility reduction technologies.” Kissinger’s 1974 Report was created by USAID, the CIA, and various federal agencies, including the USDA.

Fast forward to the 2003 Iraq War, justified using fear-mongering propaganda about weapons of mass destruction and neo-conservative malarky about rescuing the Iraqi people. The US-led occupation of Iraq became a rapacious profiteering smorgasbord for colonizing corporations husbanded by USAID. Iraq is heir to the birthplace of human civilization, made possible by early Mesopotamian agriculture: many of the grains, fruits, and vegetables that now feed the world were developed there. Iraq’s farmers saved back 97% of their seed stocks from their own harvests before the US invasion. Under Paul Bremer, Rule 81 (never fully implemented) sought to institute GMO cropping and patented seed varieties, as Cargill, Monsanto, and other corporations descended upon the war-ravaged nation using American tax dollars and USAID.

That playbook was more quietly implemented during the Ukraine War, once again orchestrated by USAID. Before the Russian invasion on February 24, 2022, Ukraine was the breadbasket of Europe, prohibiting GMO technologies and restricting land ownership to Ukrainians. Within months of US intervention, USAID assisted in the dismantling of these protections in the name of “land reforms,” free markets, financial support, improved agricultural efficiency, and rescuing the Ukrainian people. In just two years, over half of Ukraine’s farmland became the property of foreign investors. GMO seeds and drone technology were “donated” by Bayer Corporation, and companies such as GMO seed-seller Syngenta and German chemical manufacturer BASF became the dominant agricultural “stakeholders” in war-torn Ukraine. Russia may withdraw, but Ukraine’s foreign debts, soil degradation, and soft colonization will remain.

The UN, WTO, WHO, and WEF all conspire to peddle a false narrative that cows and peasant farmers are destroying the planet, and that chemical-dependent GMO monocropping, synthetic fertilizers, and patented fake meats and bug burgers must be implemented post haste (by force if necessary) to rescue humanity. The argument that pesticides and synthetic fertilizers (manufactured from natural gas, aka methane) are salvific is patently false. They are, however, highly profitable for chemical companies like Bayer, Dow, and BASF.

Jefferey Jaxon is exactly correct. The Netherlands committed to robust agricultural development following a Nazi embargo that deliberately inflicted mass famine following their collaboration with Allied Forces in Operation Market Garden. France boasts the highest cow population in all of Europe. Ireland’s culture is tightly linked to farming as part of its trauma during the (British-assisted) Irish Potato Famine. The corporate/NGO cabal now uprooting and targeting farmers in these nations and across the EU in the name of staving off climate change and preserving wildlife is a direct outcropping of Kissinger’s grand dystopian scheme launched through USAID in 1974.

Americans watch European farmer protests from afar, largely oblivious that most all of US agriculture was absorbed by the Big Ag Borg generations ago. Currency control linked to a (political, environmental, and economic) social credit scorecard promises the fruition of Kissinger’s demonic plan: “Control the food, control the people.”

Modern humans suffer a double hubris that blinds them to the contemplation of the truth of Jaxon’s hypothesis: a cultish trust in technology, coupled with an irrational faith in their self-perceived moral superiority to past civilizations (Wendell Berry calls this “historical pride”). Yet, as long as mankind has had the capacity to harm another for personal gain, humans have devised ways to control food for power or profit. Siege warfare generally depended on starving defenders of castle walls into submission.

Even if globalist food control proposals are well-intentioned, a monolithic, monocultured, industrial-dependent worldwide food system is a lurking humanitarian disaster. Berry observed:

In a highly centralized and industrialized food-supply system there can be no small disaster. Whether it be a production “error” or a corn blight, the disaster is not foreseen until it exists; it is not recognized until it is widespread.

The current push to dominate global food production using industrial systems is the cornerstone of complete globalist dominion over all of humanity. The “Mark of the Beast” without which no American will buy or sell goods – including guns, bullets, or factory-grown hamburgers and cricket patties – is mere steps away. Mr. Jaxon is correct that these leaders “know these basic historical and current facts,” and that “[f]armers are becoming endangered because of government [climate] policy … and it’s being allowed to happen.” USAID has been actively seeding and watering this dystopia for decades.

Klaus Schwab and Bill Gates are as fully cognizant of this fundamental truth as Henry Kissinger was in 1974. USAID has aided all three. Having lost almost all of their small farms over the last century, Americans are well ahead of Europeans in their near-complete dependence on industrial food.

That’s the plan.

February 19, 2025 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , , , , | Leave a comment

America’s ‘Democratic’ Allies Are Becoming More Authoritarian

By Ted Galen Carpenter | The Libertarian Institute | February 17, 2025

U.S. officials have a long history of portraying Washington’s allies and clients as democratic, even when their behavior is blatantly authoritarian. Such cynical hypocrisy was at its zenith during the Cold War, but it is surging again.

A similar trend is evident with respect to U.S. interference in the internal political affairs of other countries through such mechanisms as the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). Such agencies fund regimes and political movements that are deemed obedient to Washington’s wishes and supportive of American foreign policy objectives.  Conversely, U.S. administrations actively undermine governments or movements that they consider hostile or even just insufficiently cooperative. The actual nature of U.S. clients often is a far cry from the carefully crafted democratic image of them that Washington circulates.

A recent example of American meddling in the internal affairs of another democratic country appears to have taken place in the Republic of Georgia. According to Parliament Speaker Shalva Papuashvili, USAID spent $41.7 million to support its preferred candidates in the country’s recent parliamentary elections. Adjusted for the size of Georgia’s population, such an expenditure in the United States would amount to $3.78 billion,

The U.S. track record in Georgia since the dissolution of the Soviet Union lends credibility to the speaker’s accusation that Washington is meddling in his country’s internal political affairs. President George W. Bush fawned with praise for Mikheil Saakashvili, the leader of Georgia’s “rose revolution” in 2003. Under Saakashvili, Georgia had become a “beacon of liberty,” Bush crowed. Generous flows of aid from Washington ensued. However, massive corruption soon characterized Saakashvili’s rule, as did his growing repression of political opponents. Ultimately, Saakashvili’s adversaries ousted Washington’s beloved “democratic” client from power.

The contrast between the laudatory American portrayal of Saakashvili as a paragon of democratic reform and the reality of his conduct was stark. However, Washington’s role in Ukraine over the years has been even more pervasive and dishonest. Although Ukraine’s president, Victor Yanukovych, came to office in a 2010 election that even a team of European Union (EU) observers conceded was reasonably free and fair, officials in Barack Obama’s administration, especially Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, worked to undermine his presidency. Yanukovych’s preference for closer economic ties with Russia instead of the EU and the United States apparently was intolerable to Western policymakers.

In 2014, the United States and key NATO partners helped Ukrainian demonstrators (primarily in Kiev’s Maidan Square) force Yanukovych to flee. An intercepted telephone call between Nuland and the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine confirmed the massive extent of Washington’s interference in Ukraine’s affairs. Nuland herself later admitted that the United States had poured more than $5 billion to Ukrainian groups in the years before the Maidan uprising. Supposedly, the purpose was to “promote democracy,” but as usual, the funds went almost entirely to groups Washington considered supportive of U.S. policies. It would be hard to identify a more flagrant case of outside interference in the affairs of another country.

Even if U.S. leaders sincerely intended their largesse to bring a stronger, healthier democracy to Ukraine—which is extremely doubtful—Washington did not achieve that goal. Corruption and blatant repression have become increasingly bad under the post-Maidan governments. Even though U.S. leaders invariably portray Ukraine’s current president, Volodymyr Zelensky, as a democratic champion, his record proves the opposite. Under his rule, Ukraine has outlawed opposition parties, muzzled the press, harassed uncooperative churches, and amassed a record of arbitrary imprisonment and torture. Much of that abuse was evident before the outbreak of war between Ukraine and Russia. Confirming that any attempt to portray Zelensky’s rule as democratic is a hypocritical farce, Ukraine has now postponed elections indefinitely.

The rot of hypocrisy and covert authoritarianism has infected even governments in NATO and the European Union. A grotesque example occurred earlier this month in Romania when an election commission dominated by the two governing parties, the Social Democratic Party (PSD and the National Liberal Party (PNL), annulled the first round of the presidential election held on November 24. Instead of the candidates of those two parties advancing to the second round runoff as expected, neither one did so. Instead, Caliin Georgescu, the candidate of a right-wing populist party led the field. Elena Lasconi, a reformer representing another “minor” party took the other runoff spot.

That outcome apparently was intolerable to Romania’s political establishment or its supporters in the EU and the United States. They viewed Georgescu as especially unacceptable, since he openly criticized NATO and opposed continuing to aid Ukraine. The country’s election commission nullified the voting results and rescheduled the first round balloting for May 4, 2025. Commissioners charged that, wait for it… Russia had illegally tampered with the election! Moscow’s horrid offense was its alleged support of a Tik Tok campaign that seemed to benefit Georgescu. Tangible evidence regarding Russian involvement was noticeably absent. Despite the lack of evidence, U.S. and EU officials denounced Russia and praised the Romanian government for trashing the election.

Eugene Doyle, a reporter for New Zealand’s Solidarity.com, noted the menacing significance of this episode. “To save democracy, the US and the European elites appear to have found it necessary to destroy democracy. For the first time ever an election was overturned in an EU/NATO country. Ever,” he wrote. Doyle also cites evidence that Russia was not even the likely culprit. The Tik Tok effort apparently originated with a botched PNL scheme to siphon off votes to Georgescu from other mainstream competitors.

Moreover, as Doyle points out, “Even if the Russians did it, in what crazy world would you wipe an election for a Tik Tok campaign, particularly one that was at best a few hundred thousands of dollars’ worth of advertising/messaging/ chatting—in contrast to the millions of dollars the U.S. State Department and various branches of the U.S. government spent on the same campaign?”

The answer is that it would happen in a world where political elites in the United States and its principal allies have never really been committed to democracy. Not as a domestic governing principle and definitely not as a foreign policy objective. Instead, the alleged commitment is a propaganda tool that is discarded whenever it becomes inconvenient. We live in such a world, and have done so for many years.

February 17, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Corruption, Deception, Progressive Hypocrite | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Eruption In “BleachBit,” “Wipe Hard Drive,” “Offshore Bank” Searches In DC Suggest Deep State Panic Mode

By Tyler Durden | Zero Hedge | February 16, 2025

Internet search trends in the Washington, DC, metro area have been nothing short of stunning in recent weeks, reflecting what appears to be growing panic within the federal bureaucracy as President Trump and Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) root out corruption in non-governmental organizations (NGO) and federal agencies.

Earlier this week, internet search trends for “Criminal Defense Lawyer” and “RICO Laws” went viral on X, fueling speculation that Washington’s political elites were in panic mode. The searches coincided with DOGE’s efforts to neuter USAID’s funding of NGOs that propped up a shadow government, as well as begin cutting tens of thousands of workers from various federal agencies.

Now, more suspicious search trends have erupted among DC residents as DOGE efforts went into beast mode at the end of the week.

“Washington DC searches soar for “Swiss bank” (yellow), “offshore bank” (green), “wire money” (red) and “IBAN” (blue),” WikiLeaks wrote on X late Thursday.

Search terms “Wipe” (blue) and “Erase” (red) also moved higher in recent weeks. Wipe hard drives?

Well, yes, the search term “wipe hard drive” across the DC metro has gone absolutely parabolic.

And “BleachBit” too! 

Searches for “lawyers” have jumped.

“Statute of limitations” also soared.

Why on Earth would some DC residents panic-search keywords that suggest they are trying to cover up a crime?

Well, just take a look at this!

The accountability sheriff: Trump & DOGE are in town – and the Deep State criminals who have been misappropriating taxpayer funds for years are in panic mode.

Hence this…

Now DOGE’s “Big Balls” member, Edward Coristine, now listed as a “senior adviser” at the State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Technology, should focus efforts on those outbound ACH transfers >$1 million in the past few months…

February 16, 2025 Posted by | Corruption, Deception | , | 1 Comment

US government’s deep involvement in European journalism

By Anne-Laure Dufeal | Brussels Signal | February 10, 2025

The US government, through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), has been funnelling millions of dollars into student and professional media outlets across Europe mainly in Eastern and Central Europe, data from US government spending has shown.

This long-term financial support has been framed as part of  Washington’s “commitment to supporting democratic values and civil society in the [European] region” under the Assistance to Europe, Eurasia and Central Asia/Economic Support Fund (AEECA/ESF PD) programmes.

The scale and scope of the funding have raised questions about the extent of US influence in shaping media narratives and civil society in these regions.

Democracy or Influence? Moldova case study 

In the heart of Eastern Europe, in Moldova, a former Soviet Union country strategically located between Ukraine and Romania, the US has quietly poured millions of dollars into the nation’s media sector.

The funding, directed toward media organisations such as Internews Network Moldova, the journalist association Asociația Presei Independente (API), the Media Alternativa Association and investigative outlet Rise Moldova, has played a pivotal role in transforming Moldova’s media landscape. It has undone, little by little, the deep-rooted influence of Russia in the country television networks replacing that with its own Biden administration American influence.

Between 2019 and 2024, the Media Alternativa Association — owner of TV8, the fourth most-watched television channel in Moldova —received $1.85 million (€1.7 million) from  Washington.

Since the beginning of the Ukraine war, Western sanctions resulted in the suspension and cancellation of licences for several Russian-owned TV stations in Moldova, creating a vacuum.

US-funded media outlets quickly moved in, filling the space once occupied by Kremlin-aligned broadcasters.

According to the Media Alternativa Association, until 2022 Moldova’s broadcast landscape remained heavily influenced by Russian networks, with political parties leveraging media holdings to shape public opinion.

That influence is now waning — replaced by institutions receiving direct financial backing from the US.

US-funded investigative outlet Rise Moldova has exclusively focused on exposing Russian influence within Moldova.

It is also a member of the Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), an international investigative network with close ties to US agencies.

Critics have argued this funding has fostered a media environment more aligned with Washington’s strategic goals rather than true editorial independence.

A key architect of Moldova’s evolving media landscape is Internews Network Moldova, a US-backed organisation which has played a similar role in reshaping media environments in other Eastern European nations such as Ukraine.

Members of Internews Network Moldova – Ziarul de Gardă and NewsMaker – two of Moldova’s leading investigative media outlets, have frequently published reports linking Moldovan corruption to Russian interests.

In 2017, Internews launched a new initiative in Moldova titled “Media Enabling Democracy, Inclusion, and Accountability in Moldova” (MEDIA-M) — a project bankrolled by USAID and the UK government.

Officially, MEDIA-M sought to develop an independent, professional press sector resilient to political and financial pressures.

Its impact has been unmistakable: a media environment increasingly aligned with Western narratives and a weakened Russian presence in Moldova’s information space.

The US has also funded democratic programmes fostering the Western identity of Moldovans.

Washington’s $20 million (€19.4 million) “Moldova Resilience Initiative,” initially planned to run from 2022 to 2023 but extended to 2026, was designed to “strengthen popular support for a democratic, European Moldova” by “uniting Moldovans around a shared European identity.”

In 2024, the US government gave $83,602 to the US billionaire George Soros Moldova Foundation.

According to the website, the Soros Moldova Foundation has been supporting the European integration process of the Republic of Moldova for almost fifteen years.

These developments seemed to bear fruit when, in October 2024, Moldova held a decisive presidential election and a referendum on European Union accession.

With voters asked to choose between a pro-European future or maintaining ties with Russia, the election outcome — narrowly favouring EU integration — was attributed by some analysts, at least in part, to sustained US influence.

The monitoring of the election was entrusted to Promo-LEX, a think-tank heavily funded by the US government. In 2024 alone, Promo-LEX secured  $1.7 million (€1.6 million) in US grants.

The scale of US financial involvement in Moldova’s political and media ecosystem has been significant.

According to USAID records — some of which are no longer publicly accessible —the US has invested over $640 million (€620.6 million) in Moldova since 1992.

The actual financial commitment through grants and indirect funding mechanisms has probably hit the several  billions in payments for the whole country.

USAID “backbone” of the Ukrainian media landscape

Across the Moldovan border in Ukraine, USAID’s influence is, perhaps, even more pronounced.

Via Internews Network Ukraine, USAID funded a network of social media-driven news platforms in Ukraine, including New Voice of Ukraine, VoxUkraine, Detector Media and the Institute of Mass Information.

These outlets have published reports targeting figures including US economist Jeffrey Sachs, Republican commentator Tucker Carlson and journalist Glenn Greenwald, portraying them as part of a “Russian propaganda network”.

According to Wikileaks, Internews Network globally has ties with the Democratic Party in the US.

Oksana Romaniuk, director of the Institute of Mass Information in Ukraine, said an estimated 80 per cent of Ukrainian media outlets have collaborated with USAID in some capacity.

While this support has been instrumental in sustaining independent journalism during the ongoing conflict with Russia, it has also raised questions about the extent of US influence over Ukraine’s media environment

A report by the Centre for European Policy Analysis (CEPA), titled US Aid Freeze Numbs Ukraine, revealed that USAID was “reaching deep into areas of the state and civil society” in Ukraine.

Funding for independent media has been drawn from a $290 million (€281 million) pool allocated for democracy, human rights and governance initiatives.

These efforts, framed as support for democratic values, have also underscored the significant leverage the US holds over Ukraine’s media and civil society sectors.

USAID’s involvement in the media landscape has intensified following the outbreak of the war with Russia in 2022.

Since 2021, the organisation has provided technical support to 66 local media outlets in Ukraine, aiming to bolster independent journalism in the face of Russian disinformation and propaganda.

In the UK, the publicly-owned BBC acknowledged that USAID contributed to 8 per cent of its BBC Media Action charity funding in 2023-24.

“Like many international development organisations, BBC Media Action has been affected by the temporary pause in US government funding, which amounts to about 8 per cent of our income in 2023-24. We’re doing everything we can to minimise the impact on our partners and the people we serve,” the charity stated on its website.

While it is not directly linked to the BBC’s core news operations, that has raised questions about foreign funding in public media-led enterprises.

Similarly, it was revealed that US-owned international news outlet Politico received money via subscription to its Politico Pro platform from the US government.

Although this funding is not directly allocated to Politico’s journalism activities, subscriptions to Politico Pro — used by policymakers and industry leaders — are a source of revenue for the media organisation.

Politico is owned by Axel Springer, the media giant that also publishes the German Bild, Bild am Sonntag, Welt, Welt am Sonntag, as well as the TV channel Welt, Business Insider and the US newsletter Morning Brew.

Washington’s involvement in European media has extended beyond direct funding to local outlets.

Perhaps the most explosive revelation came in December 2024, when French investigative outlet Mediapart exposed the extent of US control over the Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP).

According to Mediapart, Washington has supplied half of OCCRP’s budget, retained veto power over senior staff appointments, and directed investigations targeting political regimes opposed by the US, such as those in Russia and Venezuela.

OCCRP’s 2023 audit report confirmed $11 million (€10.6 million) in funding from US agencies.

This revelation has sparked concerns about the independence of OCCRP and the potential for US influence to shape its investigative priorities.

The White House’s involvement in European media and civil society appeared to be part of a broader strategy.

A paper from the US Congressional Research Services published in 2022 argued that US foreign assistance was an essential instrument of the country’s foreign policy.

“Foreign assistance is the largest component of the international affairs budget and is viewed by many Members of Congress as an essential instrument of US foreign policy,” the document stated.

It revealed that in the 2019 financial year, US foreign assistance totalled an estimated $48.18 billion (€46.7 million) of the federal budget authority.

The report said that meant US foreign assistance served the United States’ soft power and sharp power ambitions around the globe. It likened it to the Marshall Plan after the Second World War that was designed to rebuild European economies so they could resume trade with the US, benefiting US industries.

In Albania, for instance, the US has recently committed $20,000 to initiatives aimed at preventing hate speech and discrimination.

While modest compared to other regions, the funding reflected a broader pattern:  Washington’s use of financial support to advance its foreign policy interests or liberal ideals.

Observers ask, where does support for democracy end and influence begin?

The US government’s funding of media and civil society organisations has reshaped narratives and counteracted Russian influence in Eastern and Central Europe.

But at what cost? Critics have argued this financial involvement risked undermining the very independence it was designed to protect.

On February 3, USAID worldwide funding was officially halted for 90 days.

February 14, 2025 Posted by | Corruption, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »