I've never been a fan of Glenn Beck, but now and again he comes up with a very interesting insight or analysis of what's going on. He's just taken a look at the flow of money from the "Deep State", quite legally through Congressional approval, to layer after layer of non-government organizations (NGO's). He accurately calls it money laundering.
Take a look at this video. It's only twelve minutes long, and very informative.
This is what's being revealed by D.O.G.E.'s "deep dive" into government expenditure. We're finding tax dollars popping up in all sorts of unexpected (and inappropriate) areas. Independent analysts like Datarepublican on X are taking that raw data, running it through spreadsheets and AI programs, and uncovering the trail of a tax dollar from place to place and organization to organization. It's a long, complex process, and it's nowhere near complete yet. It'll take months to uncover the money trail . . . but it must be done if we're to deep-six the Deep State.
Don't get impatient with the process if there are no new earth-shattering revelations, the way there were in the first couple of weeks of President Trump's term. The process goes on, and digs deeper and deeper every day. My worry is that the impatient American public will get bored with waiting, and demand something new and exciting every day. That's unlikely to happen. Instead, I suspect that after six months to a year, we're going to see a very, very large organization chart appear, tracing the links between all sorts of organizations. There will also be flowcharts (or equivalents) showing how tax dollars made their way from government to private organizations, and why, and what they did with it.
I think we're also going to see just how much money certain congressional representatives and Senators have directed to their favored causes, and how much of that has come back to them in so-called "kickbacks" or "consulting fees" or "donations to re-election expenses". I wonder how many of our legislators will face criminal charges as a result? I won't be surprised to learn the number reaches into three figures.
That, of course, means that legislators (and their allies in the mainstream media) will be frantic to shut down the investigations, or mislead them, before they can be identified as guilty parties. It's going to be like a cockroach-infested kitchen in the small hours of the morning when the light is suddenly switched on. The panic and scurrying for cover of our political insects - on both sides of the aisle - should be epic . . .
Peter
17 comments:
I believe he is in the process of figuring out how to connect names, for example the spouses and family, to see if there is a loopback there.
For fun, I plugged in the NRA to see its link to funding, and it went through a lot of layers for it to get ~$100k from some foundations. It only took a layer or two for gun control groups to get millions. Some of the problem is having tax money going to a 'foundation' where they can then obfuscate how the money is divvied up.
We should halt our government from giving money to NGOs. Probably needs to be a constitutional amendment. The abuse has been absurd.
Any of our elected representatives who are incumbents need to resign in shame. They have been voting for this nonsense.
I want to see arrests, but Trump and team have thought this out. Trump is acting under the law and I think wants to get some prosecutions with evidence that is impartial. He's doing great and has earned my conditional trust.
We really need RFKjr to get to work on healthcare for the nation. Big Pharma has got us locked in. I also really want to know who is on the Epstein list. And remember the shooting in Nashville that went awfully dark. So much darkness and so many cockroaches. At least we appear to be on the right path.
It's a house of cards. A few key prosecutions, some panic among the lower players, and the evidence grows exponentially. The punishments can't be too severe for those involved.
I will still be awaiting the first indictment of any NGO CEO. I remain a doubter, until it happens. With Musk & his efficient coders, they may be fast enough, & Diggy-Diggy-Hole-digging enough, to embarrass some congress-critters. Indicting THEM may be a bridge too far.
yeah. never was a fan of "Glenn" either. like a few others I could mention he is in love with the sound of his own voice. and lot a lot of others, I too want to see who stole the money. seems to me a lot of the so called NGO are nothing more than a grifting op.
From your mouth to God's ears!
Lots went to state and county legislators too. Plus DAs where elected. I'm sure a lot of school boards also. Thus the rainbows everywhere
See Transterrestrial today on RICO, requirements to prosecute, and methods.
http://www.transterrestrial.com/2025/02/24/the-ngo-industrial-complex/
for all those calling for a ban of any funding going to a "NGO"
first define what you mean by "NGO", the literal meaning is any organization that is not the government, including your local independent coffee shop. So a literal interpretation of blocking all funds to a NGO would mean that the government cannot spend any money with any business and must do everything in house.
Buying a computer is sending money to a NGO.
there are volunteer orgs that get small amounts of government funding and provide a lot of value to the country (I am part of Civil Air Patrol that does Search and Rescue for downed aircraft. The Air Force funds us to the tune of something like $10m/year and we fly for ~$80/hour as opposed to the military craft that are over $3k/hour. The Air Force saves far more than our budget cost every year)
I fully agree that sending large amounts of money to think tanks and international charities (and especially to organizations that specialize in giving grants to other organizations) is a bad idea and needs to halted, but "Non Government Organizations" is too broad a brush to paint with.
Sadly, I don't think 4 years is going to be long enough to get ALL the players in these scams/funding schemes, much less the people 'behind the curtain'...
Nobody is being arrested for the fraud. That's why it never stops. Weak effiminate firing and not firing squads.
It's obvious that NGOs have been used for fraud. I wrote a substack about it a few weeks back.
IF we don't arrest and incarcerate the people behind this...with a public hanging for the most egregious violators...all this will be for nought. Eventually the left will regain power and none of this will have been more than a temporary hiccup on the deliberate road to destruction.
Not so. All NGOs are non-profit entities. So buying a coffee or a computer at a local store doesn't qualify, since they are supposedly for-profit entities.
@Don C
> Not so. All NGOs are non-profit entities.
How do you define "Non Government Organizations"?
David Lang
I don't define NGOs - that would be similar to asking an attorney to give a firm definition of the color 'red'. Does pale pink qualify, or what about anything on the RGB scale that has a value of R>0?
One place you might look is Network Depot - they are an IT firm who evidently markets to NGOs for computing services. They posit that there are > 1.8 MILLION NGOs in the U.S., of which 40% they claim are schools, religious organizations, hospitals, or foundations.
NGOs often operate across national borders, whereas many non-profits are local. Or say they are. So figure out your own definition to suit your philosophy.
you are the one calling to defund them, what are you demanding get defunded?
It's easy to look at organizations working in a poor country and say 'these are government organizations', those are non-government organizations'
but if you are looking at the US government budget and saying that there are types of organizations you don't want to spend any money on, you need to be more precise.
a lot of the problematic organizations are not international, so that can't be part of their criteria. Many are non-profits (but there are many times of non-profits and not all are non-profit)
And in any case, I think what is really desired is to limit funding based on two criteria
1. is this in the best interests of the US (and remember, the President sets Foreign Policy), hard to define for Domestic orgs.
2. what is the overhead cost of the org. How is success determined by the org. Is it in man-hours of volunteers? is it in tons of food supplied?
If 90% of the money is spent on the organization staff, that can be a very bad sign or a very good sign.
If the purpose of the grant is to organize and train volunteers, having all the money go to 100 people that then enable 10,000 people for disaster relief can be a very efficient thing.
Think the org that gets building supplies donated and then buses the Amish to NC where they build houses rapidly, solidly, and for the cost of feeding them, the fact that most of the money is spent on bus maintenance, food, and bus drivers is acceptable.
If success is based on tons of food provided and only 10% of the money is spent on food that arrives, that is probably not good.
But if 0% of the money is spent of food, but the org collects and redistributes food that would otherwise be wasted (restaurant surplus, grocery store food at it's expiration date), that org could end up providing more food for each dollar than the org described above
David Lang
Post a Comment