Sometimes you have to laugh. Earlier this week, Sen. Chuck Schumer threw a toy out of his stroller in a social media post. He writes as follows. “The unelected shadow government is making hostile federal takeovers.”
As long as this historical claim has any meaning, we must speculate that Schumer was talking about government efficiency (DOGE). Schumer seemed particularly angry at the USAID closure. He continued his grouse on Donald Trump and his “billionaire companions.”
Fortunately for us who keep an eye on such things, Schumer's rant was reposted by Alex Soros.
Not many readers have heard of Alex Soros. But I can tell you this: he is not just someone who has obtained the place he has done by effort.
Alex is a large investor and son of dark money donor George Soros. He is also engaged to former Hillary Clinton aide Hama Abedin (who for some reason abandoned Anthony Wiener some time ago).
Anyone who follows Soros Jr. on social media will find him getting a pretty amazing photo opportunity. One day he posts a photo of himself with Nancy Pelosi. He then stands next to Chuck Schumer. Another day he's with Kamala and Tim Waltz (remember him?). It's still another day, he's with Pete Battigigue and Elizabeth Warren.
What an attractive life.
But why have all these people been shimming to Alex Soros in recent years? Is it a man's charisma, brain, insight, originality? No, of course not. That's because his father is a billionaire radical leftist investor, and so is him.
Everyone knew it was a salary with Democrats. If you or I ask every member of the Democratic High Command for a meeting, we are unlikely to get it. However, changing your name to Soros may give you a different result.
So it's not like Schumer & Co. They care about unelected people who have a say in the government. That means they don't like it when they're not their guys – in fact they really hate it.
There are no other principles here. Dems, who oppose Doge's work, are angry that it's not their side that once called out the shot.
Please take the USAID closure. For DEMS, this was one of their institutions. One of the taxpayer-funded Bundogurus that allows Democrats to pursue and promote their own interests. It's not American interest. their own interests. It's as strange as some of them were.
None of them were cheaper. In 2023, USAID's budget totaled approximately $40 billion. To put it in context, it roughly is the GDP of a small country like Estonia.
The agency was also run like a small country. Many years ago, Samantha Power became famous for her book she wrote about genocide. She was against it — like most people — but Democrats needed someone who could assert moral weight. And Samantha Power rose to rank and became the United Nations US ambassador under Barack Obama. During that time, she was unable to prevent genocide. But that's another matter.
In recent years, power has been the head of USAID. And during that time she has enjoyed a lovely gathering place where the foundation of radical left billionaires meets democratic activists' politics.
During her time as head of USAID, Power held multiple meetings with the Ford Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, and of course the Soros family's Open Society Foundation.
This was handed over as an innocent little heart encounter. The power argued that she simply “sought to work with charities and the private sector to catalyze resources to tackle these complex global challenges.”
Of course, Power has fine lines on Swamp Gobbledygook before 2025.
However, the agency she chaired did something that had nothing to do with the national interests of the United States.
It's not just $1.5 million for Serbian DEI. Or $2.5 million for an electric vehicle charging station in Vietnam. It also fails to meet the “gender goals” as well as the $500,000 embedded in an Indonesian coffee company. Or even millions of dollars sent to the Taliban to provide birth control pills and condoms. That could be said to have its advantages.
It's the fact that we know now that USAID and other useless departments are fixing things behind the scenes and Knicks. Find out that USAID pours millions of dollars into friendly media like Politico every year.
It's a decent trick. You mute certain media that don't like you while essentially funding the media.
And of course, the favor will be returned. Who gave her softball, exit interview with elegance when leaving USAID? Of course, why is it political? There, she boasts of how hard she worked, warns the upcoming administration about what they should do, and USAID is “the agency that thousands of people represent the United States across the world.” He insisted.
But what about them? What about them? The question is really – which vision of the United States represented by USAID?
There is a lot to tell you by USAID already deciding to scrub it from its website. As the archived version still shows, USAID's DEI strategy is to help agencies “commit to improving and strengthening diversity across the institution, strengthening inclusion and equity for everyone in the workplace, and to diversify We have committed to strengthening our workforce and accountability for inclusive maintenance. Agency Culture.”
It is not representative of the United States around the world. It represents a narrow, very outdated view of the world. An opinion that has nothing to do with the establishment principles of this country or current priorities.
If some of the Dems are unhappy with Doge's savings, they can probably just take note of one thing. It's not just like when the boots are on the other leg. But what needed this was a fundraising sprage decorated with giant donors, driven by their ideology.
