Investigations by the Department of Government Efficiency have uncovered widespread waste and misappropriation of public funds at the U.S. Agency for International Development, with money being funneled into woke propaganda and other questionable initiatives. In response, Bill Gates and the Gates Foundation have aggressively defended USAID and its $50 billion annual budget, which continues with little oversight despite opposition from most American voters.
Gates appeared on “The View” to emphasize USAID’s importance, highlight his foundation’s frequent partnerships with the agency, and express concern over the DOGE’s audit of USAID spending. He also criticized the Trump administration’s freeze on funding during the investigation, claiming the pause could endanger “millions of lives.”
One of the key revelations from the DOGE’s investigation is the extent to which USAID is the Gates Foundation and the Gates Foundation is USAID.
Framing financial accountability as a life-or-death issue is a classic rhetorical dodge. Declaring that “millions will die unless we keep getting money” is the kind of argument a protection racket might use — or a Bond villain. Yet, Gates made this claim without hesitation, and Gates Foundation CEO Mark Suzman echoed the same warning.
One of the key revelations from the DOGE’s investigation is the extent to which USAID is the Gates Foundation and the Gates Foundation is USAID. Gates presents their relationship as a public-private partnership dedicated to saving lives. In reality, it functions more like a money-laundering scheme — one that “cleans” both wealth and power for people like Gates while sustaining thousands of projects, employees, and placeholders in organizations that rely entirely on a circular flow of public funds. These funds are redirected by uniparty operatives, who, of course, also benefit from the system.
A quick search of the Gates Foundation website reveals 14 separate grants from the foundation to USAID, totaling millions of dollars. A deeper dive shows that since the Gates Foundation was established, as much as $4 billion has flowed from the foundation into projects directly controlled by USAID or USAID-Gates Foundation partnerships. This might sound like Gates generously funding lifesaving initiatives out of the kindness of his heart — but that’s not the whole story.
At the same time the Gates Foundation directs money to USAID, USAID sends money back to the foundation or to organizations like GAVI, the vaccine alliance Gates founded with an initial $750 million investment. Gates maintains significant influence over GAVI and other recipients, ensuring the money circulates between these entities before a significant portion ultimately returns to him.
When the funds are in the Gates Foundation, GAVI, or a USAID-affiliated project, Gates can claim he has given his share away. But these same organizations then make purchases from pharmaceutical, agribusiness, and green energy companies — many of which Gates holds private investments in.
Gates has directed $4 billion in so-called charitable giving toward USAID-controlled programs over the past two decades. Yet in just one year, GAVI received $4 billion back from USAID. Jon Fleetwood describes this vast money circulation as a system that transforms Gates’ private interests into “noble philanthropy” while triggering a fresh cycle of USAID funding. Public funds spent by the federal government match and eventually surpass the original donations, fueling an ever-expanding financial loop.
USAID is frequently involved in laundering taxpayer money through projects that support globalist strategic interests, which might not always align with the stated goals of development or poverty alleviation ... Gates’ GAVI was one of the top recipients of USAID grants in 2024, according to the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons. The association shared a screenshot indicating USAID awarded GAVI $4 billion for that year alone.
GAVI then uses that USAID money to buy vaccines from companies in which Gates has private investments or redirects the funds back to the Gates Foundation. Whether the money directly profits Gates or strengthens his financial network, the transactions remain largely concealed beneath the claim that this circular flow of funds is “saving lives.”
Even without absurd expenditures like funding transgender opera performances in the third world or more insidious activities such as sponsoring regime change under CIA direction, USAID spending remains deeply problematic. Powerful organizations and individuals like Bill Gates benefit from these funds while claiming to donate money, creating a fraudulent money-laundering scheme. Taxpayers, who never had the opportunity to consent to their dollars being used this way, are ultimately the ones footing the bill.
Now that Kash Patel has been confirmed as the new director of the FBI, everyone is holding their breath for the release of the Epstein list.
Glenn Beck included.
“I’m hoping, as today is his first full day in office, it will be released today,” he says, noting that last Friday, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi revealed that the list was currently sitting on her desk and ready for review.
“If he pulls out that list today and hands it to the world, we're not just talking about names on a page; we are talking about a seismic shift. … This is a reckoning that could rip the mask off of the elites that have hidden behind their wealth and their power,” says Glenn.
The obvious question is which elites?
Glenn has some theories.
Number one on Glenn’s list for people likely to be in Epstein’s black book is obviously Bill Clinton, who “flew on the Lolita Express,” Epstein’s jet.
Number two is Prince Andrew.
“He’s had pictures taken with the accusers,” says co-host Stu Burguiere.
“With the bed behind them,” adds Glenn.
Number three? Bill Gates.
“I buy that,” says Glenn, and “so does his wife, by the way.”
For now, only one thing is certain: The fact that we still don’t know who’s on the list is evidence that there are big names on it. That’s why it’s been protected all these years.
“If it was a bunch of truck drivers on that list, don't you think we'd know all of their names?” asks Glenn.
To hear more, watch the clip above.
To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
The Three Mile Island power plant was the scene of the worst commercial nuclear accident in United States history. While zero people died, it’s been used ever since as the media’s poster child for why we can’t invest in nuclear energy.
That is until now.
Constellation Energy, which claims to be America’s largest producer of clean, carbon-free energy, has just announced that it has signed the largest ever power purchase agreement with Bill Gates’ Microsoft — which in light of this agreement will be reopening Three Mile Island for business.
“Wow,” Glenn Beck of “The Glenn Beck Program” comments. “Well, what about solar panels, Bill? What about wind power?”
Gates also invested $1 billion in a nuclear power plant that broke ground in Kemmerer, Wyoming, last June.
“Now two power plants. Both of them nuclear,” Glenn says, shocked. “Nothing to worry about here. Bill Gates is a responsible human being, and so is nuclear power. It’s clean, and it’s good for the environment, and it’s totally acceptable.”
However, what Glenn really wants to know is why this is necessary.
“Why do they need this power? Not because you’re having a hard time affording electricity. Not because you’re having a hard time affording heat for your house. Not because they want to get rid of natural gas and want all of our stoves and everything else to be run on electricity. Not because we are switching over to battery cars, or that’s what they hope,” Glenn says.
“Bill Gates wants power because he wants to be the king of the world with AI, [and] he needs nuclear power plants, so he gets to build them. It’s almost as if we’re not allowed to talk about that either,” he continues, adding, “We’re not allowed to even talk about one for us. No, no, no. We have to have nuclear power plants for our new god of AI.”
To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Researchers at the Bill Gates Foundation-backed Leiden University Medical Center in the Netherlands have joined an international effort to transform mosquitoes into flying syringes. According to a study published late last month in the New England Journal of Medicine, they apparently now have an effective way of using mosquitoes to deliver some protection against malaria in unsuspecting humans — and possibly other payloads in the future as well.
Scientists have long toyed with the idea of transforming mosquitoes into "flying vaccinator[s]."
Shigeto Yoshida, the lead researcher on a 2010 study that modified mosquitoes' saliva such that they would deliver leishmania vaccines to mice when sucking their blood, noted that vaccination by insect was "just like a conventional vaccination but with no pain and no cost."
"What's more, continuous exposure to bites will maintain high levels of protective immunity, through natural boosting, for a lifetime. So the insect shifts from being a pest to being beneficial," added Yoshida.
Despite the Japanese geneticist's optimism, his study acknowledged that "medical safety issues and concerns about informed consent mitigate the use of the 'flying vaccinator' as a method to deliver vaccines."
Robert Sinden, professor emeritus of parasite cell biology at Imperial College London, told Science at the time that in addition to vaccinating people without their informed consent, no regulatory agency would sign off on the initiative.
The issue of informed consent, apparently an ongoing issue for elements of the scientific community, was evidently not enough to hinder the continued development of flying vaccinators. Hiroyuki Matsuoka of Jichi Medical University in Japan, for instance, announced that with the help of a 2008 Gates Foundation grant, he was preparing work on an engineered mosquito that could produce and secrete a malaria vaccine protein into a host's skin.
In 2022, Sean Murphy and his team at the University of Washington demonstrated the workability of that idea, testing mosquito-borne malaria vaccines on humans, establishing what they called a "proof of concept" for the technology.
'The parasite dies before it infects the blood cells and evolves into its deadly phase.'
Concerned about the short-lived and marginally effective nature of the malaria vaccines currently approved by the World Health Organization, Dutch researchers at the LUMC similarly turned to genetically modified parasites and mosquito carriers as a potential alternative.
In an earlier trial, the researchers tested the effectiveness of GA1, a malaria parasite genetically modified to stop developing after roughly 24 hours of infection in humans, but found that it only provided low protective efficacy against malaria. Hoping for a better outcome, the researchers crafted another parasite, GA2, to stop developing around six days following invasion in preclinical humanized mouse models.
The Bill Gates-backed Gavi, also known as the Vaccine Alliance, noted that "because the parasite dies before it infects the blood cells and evolves into its deadly phase, it instead acts as a way of priming the immune system, as a vaccination usually would."
Afforded a test group of 43 adults between the ages of 19 and 35 who previously had no record of malaria infection, the researchers subjected subjects to 50 bites from GA2-infected mosquitoes, 50 bites from GA1-infected mosquitoes, or 50 bites from uninfected mosquitoes (placebo), in three vaccination sessions at 28-day intervals. Three weeks following their third devouring by mosquitoes, the human test subjects underwent malaria infection with five bites from infected mosquitoes.
According to the study, eight of the nine participants in the GA2 group received effective protection against the malaria infection. Only one of eight participants in the GA1 group received protection, and none of the participants in the placebo group received protection.
The Dutch researchers now seek to replicate their results in a larger human trial.
"These findings represent a significant step forward in malaria vaccine development," Julius Hafalla, an immunologist at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, told Nature. "The ongoing global malaria burden makes the development of more effective vaccines a critical priority."
Leiden University Medical Center received a $1,578,317 grant from the Gates Foundation in September 2023 for the purpose of understanding "population and geographic factors affecting response to malaria vaccines in endemic countries." In November, the center received a Gates Foundation grant "to improve health outcomes and prevent premature death in populations around the world suffering from high rates of Malaria infection by developing next generation malaria vaccine candidates."
Bill Gates has demonstrated, both directly and through his foundation, a desire to shape public health, the news landscape, education policy, AI, insect populations, American farmland, the energy sector, foreign policy, and the earth itself.
Gates, who took issue in a January 2021 MSNBC interview with content encouraging "people not to trust the advice on masks or taking the vaccine," has poured hundreds of millions of dollars into malaria vaccine research. He noted on his blog in August, "Malaria is caused by a remarkably adaptable parasite that's constantly changing and developing resistance to our drugs and interventions. Fighting it is like playing a global game of high-stakes whack-a-mole: Just when we think we've got it under control, it pops up somewhere else or in a new form."
Gates noted further that it is important to use existing interventions while "laying the groundwork for a malaria-free future." According to Gates, that future might depend on the use of mRNA vaccines or the genetic modification of mosquito population.
According to the utopian billionaire, "One of our biggest challenges isn't scientific; it's financial and political."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Bill Gates and the World Economic Forum are promoting CRISPR as a game-changing tool in science, but behind the excitement are serious concerns about its risks.
For the uninititated, clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats technology is a gene-editing tool that allows for modifications of DNA in living organisms. Recent research reveals that CRISPR, while effective at editing genes to address inherited diseases, often introduces unintended consequences, including large-scale DNA mutations.
The potential to 'edit out' undesirable traits raises questions about eugenics and the commodification of human life.
This is a major concern.
Editing a specific gene can lead to off-target effects, altering unintended regions of the genome. This can lead to rapid mutations, potentially triggering the onset of cancers or other genetic disorders. Furthermore, even when targeting specific sequences, CRISPR's modifications can destabilize chromosomes, leading to large-scale deletions or rearrangements of genetic material. Such alterations not only disrupt the targeted gene but also affect neighboring regions, causing a cascade of genetic malfunctions.
Another critical danger lies in the complexity of biological systems. Genes rarely act in isolation; they interact within vast networks that control development, metabolism, and immunity. Changing one gene can disrupt these networks, creating unforeseen problems.
For example, CRISPR has been associated with chromosomal abnormalities that compromise cellular functions. These serious side effects are particularly concerning when CRISPR is applied to human embryos or germline cells.
That's because these changes are heritable, potentially affecting future generations.
Ethical concerns further compound the risks. The potential to "edit out" undesirable traits raises questions about eugenics and the commodification of human life. While therapeutic applications aim to eliminate genetic diseases, the same technology could be misused to enhance physical abilities, intelligence, or appearance.
This will likely pave the way for a new era of genetic discrimination, where access to CRISPR defines who holds the ultimate biological edge.
In Silicon Valley, the seeds of this dystopia are already being sown. Transhumanists champion genetic enhancement as the next step in human evolution, treating biology as a canvas to craft the "perfect" being. We are entering an age in which a privileged few will command an undeniable biological edge. The rest of us, meanwhile, will wither away in the shadows of engineered perfection.
Moreover, the technical and regulatory frameworks around CRISPR remain insufficiently robust to address its risks comprehensively. Current regulations vary widely across countries, creating opportunities for unregulated experimentation. Rogue scientists or organizations could exploit CRISPR for malicious purposes, such as developing bioweapons or creating genetically modified organisms with harmful ecological impacts.
The environmental risks are equally alarming. Releasing genetically edited organisms into the wild could wreak havoc on ecosystems. Take CRISPR-based "gene drives," engineered to spread specific traits rapidly through populations. Touted as a solution to control disease-carrying mosquitoes, they could just as easily trigger species extinctions or unleash ecological chaos if they spiral out of control or jump to unintended species.
Imagine a world where CRISPR gene drives are set loose to wipe out malaria — a mission close to Bill Gates’ heart. These gene drives, designed to spread infertility among malaria-carrying mosquitoes, are engineered to wipe out the species within a few generations. At first, it’s a triumph. Mosquito numbers plummet, malaria cases vanish. But then the nightmare really begins.
Unbeknownst to scientists, the engineered gene interacts with a natural genetic sequence in a related mosquito species. The gene drive jumps species, infecting mosquitoes vital for pollination in certain ecosystems. As their populations crash, plants reliant on pollination begin to wither. In regions already struggling with food insecurity, farmers watch helplessly as crops fail, sparking famine across entire nations.
Meanwhile, predators like bats and birds that feed on mosquitoes face a collapsing food supply and begin to die off, triggering further ecological instability. With fewer bats to control pests, insect populations explode, ravaging crops and spreading new diseases. The ripple effects spiral outward, destabilizing ecosystems and economies far beyond the initial intervention.
But the nightmare doesn’t stop there. The gene drive mutates, jumping beyond mosquitoes to other insects, including bees. With pollinators dying off, the global food chain begins to crumble. Fruit orchards, vegetable fields, and wild plants are left barren. Starvation sweeps the globe, and society crumbles into anarchy.
When humans play God with CRISPR, they gamble with the delicate balance of nature shaped over millions of years. These interventions can trigger unpredictable chain reactions. Tinkering with the genetic code of life without grasping its full complexity risks collapsing ecosystems, endangering human health, and wiping out species.
Worse, it could unleash resistant pathogens or new genetic disorders that spiral into global catastrophes. This arrogance, the delusional belief that we can outsmart nature, could be humanity’s most catastrophic misstep.
Bill Gates has more money than most of us can even imagine. If he wanted, he could disappear to some remote paradise, live in absolute comfort, and never deal with any of us again.
But for the bespectacled billionaire, it’s never just been about money. It’s about power. The man has a god complex.
Would you really take health advice from someone who looks like he’d slip a disc opening a jar of pickles?
His latest fixation involves blocking the sun. Yes, Gates, a man who looks like he hasn’t seen daylight in a decade, is backing a geoengineering project that would inject particles into the atmosphere to reflect solar rays, supposedly cooling the planet to reverse global warming.
It may sound like a science fiction plot — but it’s happening, and the implications are vast and unsettling. In short, a handful of tech moguls and venture-backed startups would be meddling with our planet’s climate on a scale that none of us voted for and none of us fully understand.
This method, known as stratospheric aerosol injection, aims to bounce sunlight back into space by dispersing particles in the upper atmosphere. But experts caution that the fallout could be devastating: unpredictable weather patterns, crop failures, droughts, and even shifts in hurricanes and disease patterns.
And, to make matters worse, it does nothing to tackle the greenhouse gas emissions. Instead, it’s a temporary Band-Aid, with the potential to send temperatures spiking if the project ever stops.
When billionaires like Gates throw their weight behind these grand schemes, there’s a troubling lack of oversight. Who ensures these experiments don’t lead to disaster? Who’s accountable if unintended consequences arise?
Without international regulations and transparency, we’re left to trust that a few wealthy individuals are acting in our best interests. But if history teaches us anything, it’s that powerful elites rarely — if ever — have our well-being in mind.
The gamble here isn’t just Gates’ money; it’s our future, our food, our planet’s ecosystems. Should Bill Gates be trusted with a project of this magnitude? Your gut says no — and you’d do well to trust it while you still can.
The gut microbiome, an incredible ecosystem within us, plays a crucial role in digestion, immunity, mood regulation, and even cognitive function. Far more than a digestive aid, it’s so intertwined with our nervous system that it’s often called our “second brain.”
The gut-brain axis — a vast communication network involving the vagus nerve and complex chemical signals — links our gut directly to our mind, shaping everything from emotional health to behavior.
This fact is not lost on Mr. Gates.
His deep investment in microbiome research goes way beyond a philanthropic interest in improving health. Interestingly, Jeffrey Epstein, who met with Gates on numerous occasions, also contributed significant funds to gut microbiome research.
Gates' heavy involvement in both food production and vaccine development isn’t coincidental. It’s part of a broader vision that merges the two worlds, a concept that becomes most evident when you look at initiatives like edible vaccines. This blending of food and medicine sounds revolutionary, promising a streamlined way to deliver health interventions. But it also brings unsettling questions.
Who controls this supply chain, and who decides which treatments are slipped into our food? Embedding medicine in our meals could just as easily make us sicker and more compliant. Maybe that’s the point.
In this interview with Bild, one of Germany’s largest media outlets, Gates spoke about the critical “relationship between the microbiome of mothers and the future of children.”
He warns that disruptions in both the intestinal and vaginal microbiomes can have severe outcomes. An imbalanced vaginal microbiome, he argues, is linked to stillbirths and premature births, while a disrupted intestinal microbiome can heighten susceptibility to diseases like HIV.
According to Gates, these imbalances drive malnutrition in children, not due to a lack of food but because chronic intestinal inflammation impairs growth and development.
Gates isn’t wrong to highlight the microbiome’s impact on health — but let’s not forget, he’s not a medical doctor (yes, they’re often wrong too). Still, should someone with no formal medical training be meddling in such delicate areas of health? Of course not. And take a look at the man — would you really take health advice from someone who looks like he’d slip a disc opening a jar of pickles?
In his Bild interview, Gates leaned hard into his devotion to putting children on the path to proper growth and long-term health. How noble.
Edible vaccines — an emerging focus for Gates — could become the bridge linking his vast investments in food production and vaccine development, merging nutrition and immunization into one potent tool.
Good for Gates, who'll no doubt be one of the elites wielding this tool. The rest of us may regret not paying attention sooner.
It’s a mask-off moment. On the “Possible” podcast, co-hosted by LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman, Bill Gates insisted humanity would need a new religion or philosophy to cope with the reality of AI and the technological conquest of the world.
In his final comment on the episode — which Hoffman calls a “tour de force” — Gates reflects at length on the spiritual situation he believes unbridled tech is coercing us into.
Maybe we want to focus on ensuring people aren’t led into the darkness of worshipping their machines or automating their religion?
“The potential positive path is so good that it will force us to rethink how should we use our time,” he says. “You know, you can almost call it a new religion or a new philosophy of, okay, how do we stay connected with each other, not addicted to these things that’ll make video games look like nothing in terms of the attractiveness of spending time on them.”
On the surface, Gates seems to be advancing a claim plenty of people can agree with — the idea that the coming virtual world will be so tempting to disappear into that only a deep source of spiritual authority will be enough to remind us that we’re still best off sharing life together as the human beings we are.
But it’s not just the virtual world he’s talking about. “So it’s fascinating that we will, the issues of, you know, disease and enough food or climate, if things go well, those will largely become solved problems. And, you know, so the next generation does get to say, ‘Okay, given that some things that were massively in shortage are now not, how do, how do we take advantage of that?’”
Here’s where things get tricky. You might have wondered already why Gates, if he feels so sure that we need cosmic protection against becoming cyber zombies, doesn’t immediately reach for a religion that already exists and flourishes — especially Christianity, which still dominates American faith identification and significant segments of public life.
Well, his assumption is that tech will make obsolete at least some of the words of Christ, such as “you have the poor with you always,” as in always there for you to help and serve. Now one might say that if physical sickness and hunger are “solved problems,” many might still (or especially) suffer from mental and spiritual illness and thirst. But even that logic is not what Gates is interested in. He’s more concerned about sports.
Yes, sports. “You know, do we ban AI being used in certain endeavors so that humans get some — you know, you know, like you don’t want robots playing baseball, probably,” he stammers. "Because they’re, they’ll be too good. So we’ll, we’ll keep them off the field. Okay. How broadly would you go with that?”
Maybe so “broadly” that we’d want to focus on ensuring people aren’t led into the darkness of worshipping their machines or automating their religion? Perhaps that’s something we need to do already, not after the machines and their self-appointed masters — no matter how well intentioned — drag us to a place where our given humanity is almost unrecognizable.
“We are so used to this shortage world that, you know, I, I, I hope I get to see how we start to rethink the, these deep meaning questions,” Gates concludes. But for all his ostensible futurism, he blinds himself to the present — where some tech-savvy Christians are carrying on the work of years in making plain that the tools we need to ensure that we don’t wipe ourselves out with awesome wonders are already at hand … because they are the same yesterday, today, and forever.
While it shouldn’t come as a shock to anyone that Bill Gates is on the Democrat team, what is shocking is just how much he’s donated to the party’s powerful machine.
In a recent report from the New York Times, it was revealed that Gates is using a nonprofit organization to donate $50 million to Kamala Harris.
“As you know, individuals aren’t allowed to donate that much, so he’s using this little shell nonprofit to give Kamala Harris $50 million,” Liz Wheeler of “The Liz Wheeler Show” comments.
However, Wheeler doesn’t believe it’s simply because Gates is a fan of Kamala.
“I wonder why? Bill Gates has a lot to hide, doesn’t he? He certainly doesn’t want RFK Jr. to be part of the Trump administration, to expose his collusion with the CDC and the FDA,” Wheeler says.
“He certainly doesn’t want Trump to expose the Epstein list, which Trump has promised to do, and he definitely doesn’t want Trump to be as based as Trump has been about fighting against — or actually JD Vance has been the real based one fighting against the bogus climate agenda,” she continues.
“And so, Bill Gates is giving $50 million to Kamala Harris because he is a frightened little coward who knows that the days that the truth is hidden are numbered,” she adds.
To enjoy more of Liz’s based commentary, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
thefederalist.com