There’s One Last Chance To Hold John Brennan Accountable For Russiagate
John Brennan’s name has resurfaced in a serious way just weeks before the Durham statute of limitations expires.John Brennan’s name has resurfaced in a serious way just weeks before the Durham statute of limitations expires.'Nothing to be proud of': State Department spits on USAID's grave following Bono, Obama eulogies
Bono, the Irish singer valued at around $700 million whose real name is Paul David Hewson, did his apparent best on the May 30 episode of "The Joe Rogan Experience" to push the narrative that the Trump administration's dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development would result in the deaths of multitudes of foreigners.
Rogan didn't buy what Bono was selling, noting, "For sure, it was a money-laundering operation. For sure, there was no oversight. For sure, billions of dollars are missing."
Just as the Irishman's fearmongering fell flat on the podcast, similar efforts by Bill Gates and other super-wealthy individuals apparently keen to keep American taxpayers running funds through their organizations and on the hook for wasteful foreign projects failed to achieve their desired effect.
'The amount of USAID dollars going to local partners increased only from 4% to 6%.'
The USAID was officially shuttered on Tuesday, just weeks after the State Department took over its foreign assistance programs.
Responding to the eulogies offered up for USAID during a video conference on Monday by former Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush, as well as by Bono, State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce made abundantly clear that tears shed for the agency are wasted on what was a bloated and ineffective bureaucracy.
To drive home her point, Bruce damned the former agency with some admissions from its former administrator and longtime champion, Samantha Power.
"Samantha Power, the last USAID director under the last administration at the end of 2024, complained in public statements that when she started only 7 percent of aid money that was assigned to various projects and groups made it to its intended destination, and that’s because of bureaucracy and layers of contractors," said Bruce. "And she was proud that she got it up to 10 percent."
Power noted in a 2021 speech, "In the last decade, despite numerous efforts, initiatives, and even support from Capitol Hill, the amount of USAID dollars going to local partners increased only from 4% to 6%."
She suggested that cash was instead poured into big, remote NGOs "because working with local partners, it turns out, is more difficult, time-consuming, and it's riskier," adding that local partners "often lack the internal accounting expertise our contracts require."
USAID funds are instead gobbled up by "implementing partners," such as private contractors, government agencies, NGOs, and international organizations. The Congressional Research Service noted:
Few foreign governments receive direct budget support, and some foreign assistance dollars never leave the United States at all — instead going to a U.S. business for the end benefit of a foreign population. Money goes to U.S. farmers, defense contractors, and management consultants, among others, for commodities or services provided to benefit foreign populations.
In 2021, Power set a target for the agency: By 2025, 25% of USAID funding would go directly to the intended destinations to support the efforts of locally led organizations. The Democratic former adviser to Obama failed miserably.
According to Devex, the percentage of eligible funding that went to local organizations went from 10.2% in 2022 to 9.6% the following year.
'We are not ending foreign aid. We are making it more nimble.'
"Less than 10% of our foreign assistance dollars flowing through USAID is actually reaching those communities," Walter Kerr, co-founding executive director of Unlock Aid, told PBS earlier this year. "About 98% of USAID grants pay for activities and not results."
"Forty-three percent of [the activities] failed to achieve about half of the intended results. But in spite of that, they still got paid in full almost every time and sometimes more," added Kerr.
Kerr indicated that working with local partners could prove far more effective.
"One study found that, when working with a local partner, as opposed to an international aid contractor, you could find savings upwards of 32% alone. And that's a conservative estimate," said Kerr.
RELATED: Pentagon spox responds to Blaze News reporter on Ukraine saying aid reduction will embolden Russia
Bruce noted that within the Trump administration's new foreign aid framework, bureaus will be assigned to various regions around the globe.
"That foreign assistance for that region will now sit with the bureau assigned to that region as opposed to some massive bureaucracy, not even housed in our building, dealing with countries and regions separately without dealing with the experts here who understand what those regions might need," said Bruce. "It will be more efficient. It will be more effective. We are not ending foreign aid. We are making it more nimble."
'This era of government-sanctioned inefficiency has officially come to an end.'
Obama, among those evidently happy to pretend USAID was worth its salt, said in a video excerpt obtained by the Associated Press on Monday, "Gutting USAID is a travesty, and it's a tragedy. Because it's some of the most important work happening anywhere in the world."
Bono reportedly read a poem, repeated his suggestion that millions will now die without USAID, then told agency workers, "They called you crooks. When you were the best of us."
Bruce countered in her Wednesday press conference by stating that "there is nothing to be proud of when 90%, according to Samantha Power, is not even making it to the people to whom it was promised."
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a July 1 article on his department's Substack page, "Beyond creating a globe-spanning NGO industrial complex at taxpayer expense, USAID has little to show since the end of the Cold War. Development objectives have rarely been met, instability has often worsened, and anti-American sentiment has only grown. On the global stage, the countries that benefit the most from our generosity usually fail to reciprocate."
"This era of government-sanctioned inefficiency has officially come to an end," continued Rubio. "Under the Trump Administration, we will finally have a foreign funding mission in America that prioritizes our national interests."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Revealed: TSA used loophole to SPY on conservatives
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has announced the end of an Obama-era program that involved spying on U.S. citizens — and cost those citizens hundreds of millions in tax dollars a year.
“Today I’m announcing that TSA is ending the Quiet Skies program, which involved having a federal agent follow U.S. citizens as they traveled by air. It was created by Obama in 2012 to supposedly track dangerous individuals, but instead it was weaponized against political enemies such as Tulsi Gabbard,” Noem said in a video posted to social media.
“Since its existence, it has failed to stop a single terrorist attack, while it cost U.S. taxpayers roughly about $200 million a year,” she added.
Independent journalist Breanna Morello has been on the frontlines of breaking this story and has uncovered just how American citizens would end up on these lists.
“What they used is a program called Evade, which was another Obama program that was started. And what they did is they used Evade to add people to the TSA terror watch list,” Morello tells BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales on “Sara Gonzales Unfiltered.”
“Evade was a private-sector company that was going out there looking at your social media posts,” Morello continues. “The reality of it is everyone I found who’s on these lists are all conservative.”
“So they intentionally went above and beyond to target people. Now, Tulsi Gabbard, the following day after she criticized Kamala Harris, was added to that terror watch list,” she adds.
Morello also explains that hundreds of Americans, including those who attended the January 6 rally, were added to the same watch list.
“For years, they were followed by air marshals, they were stalked by TSA, they went through additional groping that they didn’t have to go through,” she tells Gonzales. “But again, the TSA is not an investigative agency.”
This is why the TSA hired a private-sector company to do the work for them.
“So, chances are if you ever had a little four S’s on the bottom of your boarding pass and then you went through additional screening processes after already going through TSA, you were probably on the list, and you’re probably being followed by air marshals without knowing it,” Morello explains.
“So they’re just intentionally finding a loophole and subverting it,” Gonzales comments.
“And that loophole is a private-sector company, yes,” Morello responds.
Want more from Sara Gonzales?
To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred take to news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Democrats in disarray as AOC tops 'pathetic' list of 2028 hopefuls
The Democrats are already getting ready for the 2028 election, but their choices aren’t looking so hot. And a list created by The Hill of their top 10 contenders couldn’t make that any clearer.
“It’s not a promising list. It’s not looking that good,” Stu Burguiere of “Stu Does America” comments, adding, “They literally have, at number 10, Stephen A. Smith.”
Stephen A. Smith is an ESPN personality who has spent his career discussing sports and getting into public scuffles with Jason Whitlock of “Fearless.” Smith has publicly toyed with the idea of running for president in several interviews — but the fact that he made it on to the list has Stu pretty hopeful for the Republican ticket.
“This is how pathetic this field is. This is how thin the bench is for the Democratic Party,” he says, before moving onto number nine on the list: Rahm Emanuel.
Emanuel was Barack Obama’s chief of staff. Stu notes that he has been relatively unheard of since the Obama era.
“It’s hard to imagine he would even have a chance,” he comments.
Pete Buttigieg also made the list at number eight, which Stu says “has got to be terrifying for you if you’re on the left,” while JB Pritzker came in at number seven.
“Who put together this list? This is a catastrophe,” he says, adding, “So far, this is a bunch of nobodies outside of Stephen A. Smith, who almost certainly won’t run.”
Whoever wrote the list certainly still has hope for a Kamala Harris presidency, as she made the list at number six, right after Governor Wes Moore (D-Md.) at number five.
“This one I see a lot of hype for,” Stu says. “Hasn’t really accomplished an awful lot, kind of an unknown nationally, but he’s generally a pretty good communicator.”
Shockingly, even Governor Gavin Newsom (D-Calif.) is a top contender at number four. Stu says he “has been a catastrophe for the state of California.”
“Let’s be honest about it. He was awful during COVID. He went out to dinner when he was trying to convince everyone else they needed to be in lockdown. That was just a total disaster. He almost got recalled,” Stu explains.
Number three isn’t much better.
“Gretchen Whitmer at number three is a disaster. She’s terrible,” Stu says, before getting to number two, who Stu admits is “a bit scary to the right.”
“It’s Josh Shapiro. Shapiro has handled a lot of the situations in his state pretty well,” he explains. “He did a pretty good job coming out talking about political violence; he kind of talked about it on either side of the aisle.”
“AOC, number one. The number-one possibility, according to The Hill, for 2028,” Stu says, shocked. “I will say, there is a path there. The path is that people really don’t like Donald Trump. The presidency goes terrible, and they’ll just reflect to whatever Democrat wins, and she’s seen as the only one taking this seriously.”
“But making AOC the voice of the left is a good thing for Republicans generally. But if things go very badly, like if there’s a massive economic crisis, then any Democrat will win,” he warns.
Want more from Stu?
To enjoy more of Stu's lethal wit, wisdom, and mockery, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
6 Ways Repealing The EPA’s Intrusive ‘Endangerment Finding’ Will Make Americans’ Lives Better
The Endangerment Finding is the foundation enabling climate rules like mandating electric vehicles or causing coal fired power plant closuresTrump DOJ tells courts to pound sand, not their place to order MS-13 member back to US
An Obama judge ordered the Trump administration on April 4 to bring a deported MS-13 member — found by more than one immigration court to be a "danger to the community" — back to the United States. Days later, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously upheld the lower court's ruling in part, noting that the administration must "facilitate" Kilmar Abrego Garcia's return.
The Trump administration, ever defiant, effectively told the federal courts to pound sand, which is for the best because Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele said Monday that he does not intend to release Abrego Garcia.
Attorneys for the government indicated in a Sunday filing that while the high court had instructed the Trump administration to "facilitate" Abrego Garcia's return, "reading 'facilitate' as requiring something more than domestic measures would not only flout the Supreme Court's order, but also violate the separation of powers."
The Supreme Court previously recognized that some of the language in U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis' order was "unclear, and may exceed the District Court's authority," adding that the lesser court "should clarify its directive, with due regard for the deference owed to the Executive Branch in the conduct of foreign affairs."
'They've done nothing.'
The attorneys for the government suggested in their Sunday filing that this deference on foreign policy matters should be more or less total, noting, "The federal courts have no authority to direct the Executive Branch to conduct foreign relations in a particular way, or engage with a foreign sovereign in a given manner."
"That is the 'exclusive power of the President as the sole organ of the federal government in the field of international relations,'" continued the government lawyers. "Such power is 'conclusive and preclusive,' and beyond the reach of the federal courts' equitable authority."
The plaintiffs in the case want the Trump administration to issue demands to the Salvadoran government and send American personnel to a foreign nation and an aircraft into a foreign nation's airspace to recover a citizen of that nation.
"All of those requested orders involve interactions with a foreign sovereign — and potential violations of that sovereignty," said the government lawyers. "A federal court cannot compel the Executive Branch to engage in any mandated act of diplomacy or incursion upon the sovereignty of another nation."
The Hill reported that Xinis was enraged Friday upon learning of the administration's continued refusal to comply with her order.
"Have they done anything?" the vexed Obama judge asked Deputy Assistant Attorney General Drew Ensign.
"Your honor, I don't have personal knowledge," said Ensign.
"OK, so they've done nothing," said Xinis.
Michael Kozak, senior bureau official in the State Department's Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, confirmed in a sworn statement Saturday that Abrego Garcia "is currently being held in the Terrorism Confinement Center in El Salvador. He is alive and secure in that facility. He is detained pursuant to the sovereign, domestic authority of El Salvador."
Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran national, stole into the U.S. illegally and without inspection in 2011.
He was summoned in March 2019 to appear in removal hearings. During a bond hearing, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement revealed that a confidential informant flagged Abrego Garcia as an active member of the terrorist organization Mara Salvatrucha. The illegal alien's bond was denied, with the court finding he "was a danger to the community."
The following month, Abrego Garcia appealed the ruling to the Board of Immigration Appeals but was once again recognized as a gang member as well as a flight risk.
The judge stated, "The fact that a 'past, proven, and reliable source of information' verified the Respondent's gang membership, rank, and gang name is sufficient to support that the Respondent is a gang member, and the Respondent has failed to present evidence to rebut that assertion."
Abrego Garcia's lawyers maintain that the gang label is false.
Although found removable, Abrego Garcia managed to secure a form of relief called withholding of removal in October 2019.
As a result, he avoided removal until March 12, when ICE agents in Baltimore notified Abrego Garcia that his "status has changed," then arrested him.
Government attorneys indicated that after his initial detention, the illegal alien was questioned about his gang affiliations, transferred to a detention center in Texas, then removed to El Salvador.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Obama judge orders Trump admin to bring mistakenly deported MS-13 member back to US
The Trump administration deported an illegal alien on March 15 who was found by more than one immigration court to be a "danger to the community" and a member of the terrorist organization Mara Salvatrucha.
While a prime candidate for removal, government attorneys indicated that Kilmar Abrego Garcia was ultimately deported to El Salvador "because of an administrative error."
An Obama judge ordered the Trump administration on Friday to bring the Salvadoran national back into the United States. On Sunday, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis doubled down on her order, claiming that immigration agents "had no legal authority to arrest [Abrego Garcia], no justification to detain him, and no grounds to send him to El Salvador — let alone deliver him into one of the most dangerous prisons in the Western Hemisphere."
Xinis appeared particularly concerned that Abrego Garcia, whose lawyers claimed he is not a gangster, has been placed in a facility that "intentionally mixes rival gang members without any regard for protecting the detainees from 'harm at the hands of the gangs,'" stating that the "risk of harm shocks the conscience."
The Obama judge further suggested that Abrego Garcia's detention at the southern nation's Terrorism Confinement Center "appears wholly lawless"; that "equity and justice compels" Garcia's return to the United States; that the "legal basis for the mass removal of hundreds of individuals to El Salvador remains disturbingly unclear"; and that the government's "jurisdictional arguments fail as a matter of law."
Attorneys for the government previously indicated both that U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis lacks the jurisdiction to make such an order and that the Trump administration cannot bring the gang member back as he is no longer in American custody.
On the matter of jurisdiction, the Obama judge asserted that the "United States exerts control over each of the nearly 200 migrants sent to CECOT," noting "the Defendants detained them, transported them by plane, and paid for their placement in the mega-jail until 'the United States' decides 'their long-term disposition.'"
Xinis claimed further that she "retains jurisdiction because Abrego Garcia challenges his removal to El Salvador, not the fact of his confinement."
'We suggest the Judge contact President Bukele.'
Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg, the lawyer for Abrego Garcia, told Xinis that he wants to see the Trump administration "put on a leash" to make sure his Salvadoran client is returned in a timely manner, reported CNN.
The Obama judge, apparently keen to oblige Sandoval-Moshenberg, has ordered the government to "facilitate and effectuate the return" of the MS-13 gangster by no later than 11:59 p.m. on Monday.
Stephen Miller, White House deputy chief of staff, said in response to Xinis' order, "Marxist judge now thinks she's president of El Salvador."
Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin underscored in an interview last week that Abrego Garcia "is actually a member of MS-13 who was involved in human trafficking. It's unbelievable the framing of this. Whether this man is in El Salvador or in a U.S. detention center, he should be locked up."
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement, "We suggest the Judge contact President Bukele because we are unaware of the judge having jurisdiction or authority over the country of El Salvador."
While the Trump administration has found itself dealing with multiple activist judges like Xinis, in this case it has also suffered from players taking shots on their own net.
Erez Reuveni, the acting deputy director of the Department of Justice's immigration litigation division, was placed on administrative leave Saturday for bungling the case and failing to "follow a directive from [his] superiors," according to a letter sent to the lawyer and obtained by the New York Times.
Reuveni, 15-year veteran of the division, furnished Xinis with commentary that she made good use of in her Sunday ruling. He said that Abrego Garcia's deportation should never have taken place and expressed frustration with having the case land on his desk.
"At my direction, every Department of Justice attorney is required to zealously advocate on behalf of the United States," Attorney General Pam Bondi told the Times in a statement over the weekend. "Any attorney who fails to abide by this direction will face consequences."
It's unclear whether Reuveni's replacement will do a better job fighting to keep foreign gang members out of the homeland.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Biden admin hindered efforts to cancel grants to climate groups under criminal investigation
In the wake of President Donald Trump's landslide electoral victory, the Biden administration apparently reworked an Environmental Protection Agency grant agreement with an Obama administration staffer's climate alarmist group in order to make it difficult for the incoming administration to reclaim a $7 billion award.
Climate United Fund, one of the recipients of the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund program that is now under criminal investigation and getting axed by the Trump EPA, is now apparently exploiting that strategic hindrance in a desperate effort to get its hands on the money promised by the Biden administration.
Background
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin and the U.S. Department of Government Efficiency announced the discovery last month that the Biden administration parked roughly $20 billion at Citibank as part of a climate-branded scheme created under the Inflation Reduction Act that was "purposefully designed to obligate all of the money in a rush job with reduced oversight" for the benefit of fellow travelers.
The agency indicated on March 2 that it was cooperating with the Department of Justice and FBI's ongoing criminal investigation into the matter and that it had also referred the "concerning matter of financial mismanagement, conflicts of interest, and oversight failures" in the GGRF program to the EPA's Office of Inspector General.
One of the intended recipients of the funds was a new nonprofit linked to staunch Biden ally Stacey Abrams, the failed gubernatorial candidate who sided with alleged domestic terrorists in 2023 and was slapped in January with what the Georgia State Ethics Commission indicated was likely "the largest Ethics Fine ever imposed by any State Ethics Commission in the country related to an election and campaign finance case."
The Abrams-linked nonprofit, Power Forward Communities, was awarded a $2 billion grant last year as part of the GGRF program despite being just a few months old and having no history of competently managing funds.
Daniel Turner, founder and executive director of the energy advocacy organization Power the Future, told Blaze News that the obligation of billions of taxpayer dollars to PFC and other brand-new climate groups with minimal or no track records of accomplishments "screams corruption and is absolutely worthy of IRS and DOJ investigations."
'EPA has determined that these deficiencies pose an unacceptable risk to the efficient and lawful execution of this grant.'
"I've always enjoyed the show 'Shark Tank,' and since I spend about half my life on the road and I'm in hotels a lot, it's kind of my go-to program to watch at nighttime," said Turner. "The sharks always ask about earnings before they make an investment, and that's usually where they will decide what they're going to do. Stacey Abrams' group had received $100 in donations and then got a $2 billion grant. The math tells me that that is a 20 million-times earnings investment. I've never never seen a shark make an investment at 20 million times earnings."
"It shows you the frivolity of the people in these agencies, the true political nature of grant-making, and it also explains the ire these folks have towards Elon Musk and DOGE — the ire that's turned into complete violence," continued Turner. "This is their lifeblood, and it's being taken away from them, but it never should have been theirs to begin with."
Climate United Fund's money troubles
Climate United Fund, an organization formed in 2024 and led by Beth Bafford, a former special assistant in the Obama administration's Office of Management and Budget, similarly planned to ride the last gravy train out of the Biden administration.
According to court documents, the FBI recommended that Citibank freeze CUF's account in late February, citing "credible information" that it was among a number of accounts that had "been involved in possible criminal violations" including wire fraud and conspiracy to defraud the United States.
On March 4, the Treasury Department directed Citibank not to disburse funds from the GGRF accounts, including that belonging to CUF, citing the EPA's "concerns regarding potential fraud and/or conflicts of interest related to the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund."
When it discovered that it couldn't drain its slush fund and that it might not ultimately receive any of its $6.97 billion GGRF award, CUF — like other groups impacted by the EPA's funding freeze and grant terminations — filed a lawsuit on March 8 against both the EPA and Citibank, alleging that the "EPA has acted to prevent Citibank from dispersing [sic] funds, harming Climate United, its borrowers, and the communities they serve."
The EPA, which proved willing to battle it out in the court, subsequently notified the plaintiffs that it was terminating their grants, stating that "following a comprehensive review and consistent with multiple ongoing independent federal investigations into programmatic fraud, waste, abuse, and conflicts of interest ... EPA has determined that these deficiencies pose an unacceptable risk to the efficient and lawful execution of this grant."
'They're just fighting for their own entity's survival because they don't want to get a real job.'
According to the grant agreement between the climate groups and the EPA, the awards can be terminated only if:
- "a grant recipient engages in 'substantial' noncompliance such that 'effective performance' is 'materially impaired'";
- "a recipient engages in 'material misrepresentation of eligibility status'"; or
- "for 'waste, fraud, or abuse.'"
An Obama judge ruled Tuesday that the EPA could not reclaim the Biden-era grants. U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan did not, however, enable CUF and other climate alarmist groups to withdraw the billions of taxpayer dollars they believe they are owed.
The climate groups' efforts to get their hands on the taxpayer funds have dragged some questionable details about the grants into the light.
EPA's diminished agency
Sarah Bedford of the Washington Examiner highlighted that a month after Trump crushed Kamala Harris at the polls, the Biden Environmental Protection Agency amended its grant agreement with Climate United Fund, making it harder to revoke the award.
Eric Amidon, chief of staff of the EPA, noted in a Monday court filing that the agency's grant agreement with CUF originally issued in August did not "define the terms 'materially impaired' or 'waste, fraud, and abuse,' and used the terms in a manner that left EPA with significant discretion to administer the agreement." However, Amidon noted that in December 2024, the EPA issued an amended grant agreement to CUF that altered its compliance and termination provisions and defined the above terms.
As a consequence of the changes, the EPA effectively lost its contractual authority "to find CUF in immediate noncompliance for failing to report the expenditure of grant funds, audit results, and project status"; "to oversee subrecipient compliance with statutory, regulatory, and contractual requirements"; and to spend grant funds only on allowable activities," said Amidon.
Amidon also indicated that the Biden administration's post-election definitions for "materially impaired" and "waste, fraud, and abuse" further tied the EPA's hands, restricting the agency's ability to terminate the award "absent evidence of severe criminal or civil violations."
Climate United Fund has leaned on the agreement in its lawsuit against the EPA and Citibank.
"This is absolutely intentional," Turner told Blaze News, referring to the broader alleged "gold bars" plot. "This was all very deliberate in preparation for what the Trump administration would do."
Brent Efron, a former EPA special adviser for implementation, was caught on hidden camera before Trump took office claiming that the agency was dumping billions of dollars in grants to nonprofits to make sure the Biden administration's climate initiatives remained afloat even after the Democrats lost their footing in the White House.
"Now it's how to get the money out as fast as possible before they [Trump administration] come in," said Efron. "It's like we're on the Titanic and we're throwing gold bars off the edge."
"In the grants process, grants can always be amended by the grantor. I deal with donors who want to fund certain projects, and circumstances change, and therefore the nature of the grant changes. That's understandable," said Turner. "But it's never been about an election, and that's the only criteria that changed with some of these groups that were awarded grants — Trump was now going to be president. And so it does raise a larger question: What was the grant ever about? What was the grant's nature? Because if it was combatting racial disparities in the climate space or whatever the phraseology they used, none of that has changed. Only thing that changed was the political circumstances, and so changing the grant based on politics sort of de facto proves that the nature of the grant is purely political."
Turner suggested that the groups now fighting over the frozen slush fund are "fighting for the quality of life that the taxpayers were awarding them. They're not fighting for groups. They're not fighting for maligned or marginalized individuals. They're just fighting for their own entity's survival because they don't want to get a real job."
Blaze News reached out to the EPA for comment but did not immediately receive a response.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Today's top stories
thefederalist.com
www.theblaze.com