Commentary by Steve Goreham originally published by RealClearEnergy and made available via RealClearWire

Trump Administration actions to scale back renewable energy capture headlines, but citizens are also pushing back. Efforts to deploy wind and solar systems face a rising tide of opposition in towns, counties, and states. Mandates for electric vehicles and electric home appliances are being challenged. The combination of rising local opposition and Trump funding cuts threatens to end the transition to green energy.

The green energy revolution in the United States has run almost unopposed for the last two decades. Driven by the fear of human-caused global warming, federal regulators enacted an expanding array of incentives for renewables in the form of mandates, tax credits, loans, and subsidies. States added incentives to push for the adoption of wind, solar, electric vehicles, heat pumps, green hydrogen, and carbon dioxide (CO2) capture systems.

Twenty-three states have laws or executive orders requiring Net Zero electricity by 2050. Power companies have been forced to comply with state mandates. Since 2000, wind and solar have grown from near zero to about 16% of US power generation in 2024, wind (10.5%) and solar (5.1%).

Twenty-two states have electric vehicle (EV) mandates, requiring all sales of new cars to be EVs by a future date, such as 2035. Tightening CO2 emission standards from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) force manufacturers to sell an increasing share of EVs. Plug-in EV sales grew from zero two decades ago to 8% last year.

Climate policy advocates want homeowners to switch from natural gas and propane appliances to heat pumps and other electric appliances. In 2019, Berkeley, California became the first city to prohibit natural gas in new residential construction. Cities and counties in seven states now ban gas in new construction, including a statewide ban in New York.

The wave of renewable energy programs promoted and subsidized included electric vehicle charging stations, CO2 pipelines, and green hydrogen production facilities. But it’s becoming clear that many towns, counties, and states no longer support the green energy movement. A rising tide of opposition threatens the deployment of renewables.

Last month, the State House of Arizona passed legislation that would prohibit construction of wind systems on more than 90% of state land. The legislation would force new wind projects to be at least 12 miles from any residential property. The bill is being considered in the Arizona Senate.

Oklahoma is the third largest generator of electricity from wind in the US. But attendees at recent rallies at the state capitol call for bans on new wind and solar projects. Local residents voice economic, environmental, and health concerns about renewable systems.

The opposition to wind and solar has been growing for more than a decade and recently accelerating. In 2009, North Carolina banned new wind projects in 23 counties. Kentucky enacted an effective statewide ban on new wind construction in 2014. Connecticut, Florida, Tennessee, and Vermont have established bans which are effectively statewide.

A 2023 study by USA Today found that the number of counties in the US with wind turbine restrictions or bans rose from two in 2008 to 411 in 2023. The number of blocking counties rose to over 500 in 2024 with Florida’s ban on wind systems offshore and within one mile of the coast. About 16% of US counties now ban or restrict wind systems. More than 100 counties restrict the deployment of solar systems. The number of counties that ban wind or solar is rising faster than counties which are deploying wind or solar for the first time.

Journalist Robert Bryce has developed a Renewable Rejection Database. The database shows a cumulative total of 800 of wind and solar project rejections in the US since 2015. It shows a rising trend in rejections, including an especially large jump in solar rejections in 2022, 2023, and 2024.

There are many reasons for rising opposition to wind and solar projects. Towns are concerned with the aesthetic impact of 600-foot-high turbine towers and acres of solar panels, the loss of farmland to sprawling wind and solar systems, low-frequency noise from wind turbines, and the impact on nearby property values. Retiring systems generate vast quantities of turbine blade and solar panel waste that fill up local landfills or must be shipped to landfills in other states.

Wind and solar require more than 100 times the land compared to coal, gas, or nuclear power generators for the same average electricity output. While traditional power plants are usually located near cities, utility-scale wind and solar systems are spread over wide areas, often on ridge lines and located far from population centers. Therefore, renewables require long transmission lines and two or three times the transmission towers compared to conventional power plants. Residents often oppose the construction of new transmission as well.

Some states have decided to overrule local opposition to wind and solar. A 2023 Illinois state law overruled restrictions or bans on wind and solar established by more than half of state counties. A 2023 Michigan state law also overruled local opposition from more than 20 counties. Local opposition can be bypassed in seven other states.

In 2024, electric vehicle sales grew only 7% in the US. California and ten other states currently mandate that 35% of new car sales must be EVs in the 2026 model year. With slowing consumer adoption of EVs, these goals are impossible for all states except California. At the end of 2024, Virginia cancelled their EV mandate. Look for other states to cancel as well.

As we mentioned, cities and counties in seven states have banned gas appliances in new construction, but in the last five years, 24 states enacted regulations prohibiting city and county bans on gas appliances. Most states want citizens and businesses to be able to choose the home energy that they prefer.

Utilities are rethinking plans for renewable electricity. The artificial intelligence revolution may require Texas, Virginia, and other states to double power generating capacity within the next decade. Wind and solar systems can’t meet this demand. Nuclear plants are being restarted, coal plant closings are being postponed, and more than 200 gas-fired power plants are in planning or under construction.

Carbon dioxide capture and green hydrogen projects are also being challenged. South Dakota just signed a law prohibiting the use of eminent domain to seize land for CO2 pipelines. CO2 capture projects in Louisiana face severe local opposition. And regional green hydrogen hubs are sure to be opposed.

With Trump funding cuts and escalating local opposition to renewables, 2025 may be the beginning of the end of the green energy transition in the United States.
__________

Steve Goreham is a speaker on energy, the environment, and public policy and author of the bestselling book Green Breakdown: The Coming Renewable Energy Failure.

This article was originally published by RealClearEnergy and made available via RealClearWire.

Investigation by James Varney originally published by RealClearInvestigations via RealClearWire

When the Biden administration announced $27 billion in environmental grants last April, it set the clock ticking on a predicament: how to get the unprecedented sums for the President’s envisioned NetZero future out the door before the fiscal year ended on Sept. 30?

The task was complicated by the fact most of the money – $20 billion – would go to just eight nonprofits that, like the Environmental Protection Agency itself, had never handled such gargantuan grants.

In hindsight, it’s easy to suspect that corners were cut, or laws were broken, or, at the very least, extraordinary measures were taken.

Those possibilities are clearly on the mind of EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin as he tries to unravel what happened to Inflation Reduction Act spending that the Biden White House’s Office of Management and Budget and the EPA decided to expedite before the November election – an effort that included moving the roughly $20 billion to a private institution, Citibank, away from oversight of the Treasury Department.

On Wednesday, Zeldin moved to terminate the arrangements as the enriched nonprofits have filed lawsuits looking to protect their grants. The battle has thrust into the spotlight what had been a rather quiet attempt by the Biden administration to spend the $27 billion.

The money was put into the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, a new entity born in 2022’s Inflation Reduction Act, which Democrats pushed through Congress without any Republican support.

“This bold investment will not only deploy clean energy and combat the climate crisis but also improve health outcomes, lower energy costs, and create high-quality jobs for Americans,” Biden’s EPA declared when seeking applications for the grants, “all while strengthening our country’s economic competitiveness and ensuring energy security.”

The grants, unveiled April 4, 2024, came with its built-in deadline to push the money out just months away. So a political deal was struck between the White House’s Office of Management and Budget and EPA, current agency officials told RealClearInvestigations. As a hedge against future administration attempts to curb the program, the deal classified the now-suspect $20 billion in a novel way making it hard to track.

Zeldin has asked the EPA’s inspector general and the Department of Justice to investigate the unorthodox arrangement.

Read the entire investigation here.
__________

By James Varney originally published by RealClearInvestigations via RealClearWire

Investigation by Jeremy Portnoy originally published by RCI and RealClearWire

Topline: The Biden administration gave Canadian electric bus maker The Lion Electric Company $160 million in subsidies to manufacture 435 buses for schools around the U.S. The company is nearing bankruptcy and laid off almost half its employees, but $95 million of the buses have still not been provided, according to the Washington Free Beacon.

Some of the $65 million worth of buses that were delivered are not without problems. The Environmental Protection Agency is investigating Lion Electric for fraud after the buses it sent to Winthrop Public Schools in Maine were unusable for a year and a half due to faulty parts.

Key facts: Lion Electric received the third most money of all manufacturers subsidized by President Biden’s $5 billion Clean School Bus program, yet there are still 55 school districts waiting for their buses, the Free Beacon reported.

Meanwhile, Lion Electric’s stock has fallen to $.08 per share compared to $33.48 in January 2021. The company has also allegedly faced issues with properly disclosing its finances. A group of investors sued the company last year for its allegedly “grossly unrealistic financial projections,” and the Securities and Exchange Commission issued a warning last August over inaccurate numbers

The issues were already clear when the government awarded its grant to Lion Electric in October 2022. The company had reported $17.2 million in losses in the previous three months, the Free Beacon reported.

Winthrop Public Schools in Maine is in a particularly tough spot. The school is required to either use the EV buses or pay back the federal grant used to buy them. Many of the buses are out of commission, and the school says Lion Electric has not provided support.

Lion Electric is required to pay Winthrop back for any time the buses spend off the road, but the school told Central Maine they don’t expect to get the $57,000 they are owed.

The company nearly received another $50 million subsidy from the State of Illinois, but it failed to keep the required number of employees on staff.

Search all federal, state and local government salaries and vendor spending with the AI search bot, Benjamin, at OpenTheBooks.com.

Summary: Americans deserve investments in companies that are fully vetted and do what they promise to do.
__________
By Jeremy Portnoy – The #WasteOfTheDay is brought to you by the forensic auditors at OpenTheBooks.com

This article was originally published by RCI and made available via RealClearWire.

Investigation by Jeremy Portnoy originally published by RCI and RealClearWire

Topline: The White House subscribes to POLITICO Pro, a premium service meant to inform the public what is happening inside the White House, spending $16 million since 2017, according to a new report from OpenTheBooks.com.

It’s part of $44.2 million the federal government has paid POLITICO in subscription fees since 2017: $32.3 million from 38 different executive agencies and subagencies, and $11.9 million from offices in the House of Representatives.

Key facts: The Department of Health and Human Services is POLITICO’s best customer on the Hill, with $6.9 million spent on subscriptions since 2017.

President Donald Trump’s administration spent between $1 million and $3 million on POLITICO subscriptions during each year of his first term. Then, spending increased under President Joe Biden, reaching a high of $7.8 million in 2023.

The premium subscriptions to POLITICO Pro cost nearly $3,000 per person.

The Pro service is meant to help “lobbyist, executive, consultant, researcher, strategist, or analyst” get “the inside scoop on the public policy and players that matter most to you” with “elite access” from POLITICO’s reporters.

One might expect that having a job inside the actual White House would be a better kind of elite access than anything POLITICO can provide.

The government has not sent any direct assistance to POLITICO, aside from a $1,000 Covid-19 relief grant in 2020.

Search all federal, state and local government salaries and vendor spending with the AI search bot, Benjamin, at OpenTheBooks.com.

Background: On Feb. 5, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt announced that the more than $8 million the U.S. Agency for International Development has sent to POLITICO would be canceled by the Department of Government Efficiency. There was only one problem: USAID has only spent $44,000 on POLITICO subscriptions, OpenTheBooks found in its review of federal data.

The false claim originated with a social media post on X. It was picked up by online political commentators, and within hours was repeated by Leavitt.

“Upon coming out here to the briefing room, I was made aware of the funding from USAID to media outlets including POLITICO,” Leavitt said in her press briefing. “The more than $8 million in taxpayer dollars that have gone towards essentially subsidizing subscriptions to POLITICO will no longer be happening.”

Rep. Lauren Boebert also falsely claimed during a Congressional oversight hearing that POLITICO is laying off staff because its nonexistent USAID funding was cut, Will Sommer of the Washington Post reported.

Summary: Paywalls and subscription fees are enough of a nuisance in taxpayers’ personal lives without having them funding the White House’s reading material.
__________

By Jeremy Portnoy – The #WasteOfTheDay is brought to you by the forensic auditors at OpenTheBooks.com

This article was originally published by RCI and made available via RealClearWire.

Investigation by Jeremy Portnoy originally published by RCI and RealClearWire

Topline: Alexander Eastman, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection acting chief medical officer, is accused of drinking while carrying a firearm and rewriting government purchasing rules to buy fentanyl lollipops. He is the highest-paid employee in the history of the Department of Homeland Security, according to payroll records obtained by OpenTheBooks.com.

Key facts: Eastman was hired in 2017 with a salary of $133,443. By 2020, he was earning $301,146, making him the first and only Homeland Security employee with a salary above $300,000.

He has been the highest-paid employee in the department every year since, with a salary of $323,933 in 2024.

Eastman worked at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center as an assistant professor of surgery from 2009 to 2018, earning at least $300,000 in taxpayer-funded salary nearly every year.

His university salary topped out at $363,320 in 2017 — the same year he was hired by Homeland Security, meaning he collected salary from both the federal government and the State of Texas. Eastman also earned concurrent salaries in 2018.

In total, Eastman earned $4.7 million from taxpayers from 2009 to 2023. The figure includes $1.7 million from the federal government and $2.9 million from Texas.

Eastman’s LinkedIn page indicates he was also employed by the Dallas Police Department from 2004 to 2016, but he is not listed in OpenTheBooks’ Dallas payroll records.

Search all federal, state and local government salaries and vendor spending with the AI search bot, Benjamin, at OpenTheBooks.com.

Background: Eastman was the Acting Chief Medical Officer for U.S. Customs and Border Protection while on assignment from Homeland Security, beginning in 2023.

In February 2024, whistleblowers working with the Government Accountability Project sent a letter to Congress with allegations against Eastman.

Eastman allegedly tried to order fentanyl lollipops for a helicopter trip to the United Nations in New York City in September 2023, spending “copious hours of staff time” with several employees on the “urgent” request.

Eastman allegedly said the lollipops were needed for “pain management” in case an employee was injured during the trip, or they encountered a “patient in need.”

When told the lollipops would violate department procurement rules, Eastman allegedly wrote a new set of rules and signed it himself. In the end, employees could not find a lollipop seller in time for the trip.

The same letter claimed that Eastman “has frequently spoken lewdly about women … creating a hostile environment for employees.” Employees also said Eastman “frequently” travels between Washington D.C. and his home in Texas, a “gross waste of taxpayer dollars” to “accommodate his remote work.”

Another letter in May accused Eastman of drinking alcohol while wearing a pistol around his waist “on multiple occasions,” which would violate employee conduct rules.

In December, Eastman was reassigned back to Homeland Security headquarters.

Summary: Eastman is innocent until proven guilty, but if any of the allegations are true, that’s no way for a Chief Medical to behave, especially not while being paid $323,933.
__________

By Jeremy Portnoy – The #WasteOfTheDay is brought to you by the forensic auditors at OpenTheBooks.com

This article was originally published by RCI and made available via RealClearWire.

Commentary by William Barclay originally published by RealClearPolitics and RealClearWire

On Jan. 29, 2025, President Trump ratified an executive order that pledges to deport any foreign students or resident aliens in the United States of America who have participated in pro-Palestinian protests.

In response, countless left-wing politicians and pro-Palestinian pundits immediately cried out that Trump’s new EO grotesquely violates the fundamental human rights of America’s resident aliens and foreign students, specifically the “right to free speech.”

For example, The Council on American-Islamic Relations immediately accused the Trump administration of an assault on “free speech and Palestinian humanity under the guise of combating antisemitism …” and condemned Trump’s executive order as “… dishonest, overbroad and unenforceable.”

However, despite the plaintive bleating of the left and its vain cohort of pro-Palestinian pundits, President Trump’s order does not violate the human rights of any person or people.

Rather, President Trump’s EO is actually a noble and necessary effort to safeguard the fundamental human rights of all Americans.

In fact, it is clear that the bevy of left-wing pundits and pro-Palestinian supporters who have leapt to decry President Trump and indict his executive order have happily all ignored the very basis for any human rights in every liberal-democratic society.

Specifically, within any democratic state or society, every citizen’s fundamental rights, such as the “right to property” or the “right to free speech,” are predicated upon the Lockean proviso that there must always be “as much and as good” left for other citizens.

For instance, if a person decides to acquire property, then its acquisition must not somehow impede or prevent other people from being able to obtain their own property or from exercising their own respective right to property freely and completely. Similarly, if a citizen or a group of people elects to exercise their right to free speech, then they cannot thereby preclude any other citizens from exercising their own respective right to free speech or participating freely within society.

Unfortunately, by participating in the slew of barbaric pro-Palestinian protests that have inundated American society since Oct. 7, 2023, the countless resident aliens and foreign students whom Trump now seeks to deport have precluded various people and communities in America from their own respective right to free speech, and, therefore, they are themselves no longer entitled to its exercise, particularly on American soil.

Firstly, pro-Palestinian protests have consistently violated the LGBTQ+ community’s right to free speech and have violently disrupted numerous pro-LGTBQ+ events throughout the U.S., in order to espouse their own dogged pro-Palestinian ideology and support for terrorist organizations, such as Hamas and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.

For instance, in New York City, a horde of pro-Palestinian protestors violently disrupted and abruptly curtailed NYC Pride, and the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department was forced to arrest 19 overtly hostile pro-Palestinian demonstrators and disperse countless others, after a swarm of pro-Palestinian protestors aggressively blockaded and halted the St. Louis Pride Parade.

Worse still, whenever the pro-Palestinian protestors have invaded LGTBQ+ events and spaces they have explicitly espoused fervently homophobic beliefs and ideology. In fact, around the world, pro-Palestinian protesters have been accused of “… bringing violence, homophobia and antisemitism to the front door of state conference.”

Moreover, since Oct. 7, pro-Palestinian extremists and protestors have violently attempted to preclude America’s Jewish community, as well as countless non-Jewish supporters of the state of Israel, from their own respective right to free speech and from freely participating in political discourse in America.

For example, on university and college campuses across America, such as Columbia, Harvard, and UC Berkeley, pro-Palestinian protestors have violently attacked and harassed Jewish students and staff, as well as any person or group that is even remotely pro-Israel. As a result, countless Jewish students and faculty members have been terrorized into forgoing their own respective right to free speech and intimidated into refusing to participate in any of the dialogue and discourse that surrounds the Israel-Palestine conflict on campus out of fear for their own personal safety.

In addition, pro-Palestinian protestors have frequently attacked pro-Israel rallies and Jewish events, as well as countless innocent Jewish people, in an explicit effort to intimidate the Jewish community and violently prevent Jews and supporters of the state of Israel from exercising their right to free speech. In fact, a 69-year-old Jewish man, Paul Kessler, was even beaten to death, after a mob of pro-Palestinian protestors stumbled upon a pro-Israel rally near Los Angeles.

Therefore, it is readily apparent that President Trump’s executive order does not violate the human rights of any person or people.

In truth, despite the plaintive bleating of the left and its constant efforts to misconstrue President Trump as an enemy to human rights and democracy, his executive order is actually a noble and necessary effort to safeguard the fundamental right of all Americans to free speech against any violation.
__________

William Barclay is a political theorist and private consultant, as well as a contributor for Young Voices. William’s work has been published by the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, Palgrave-Macmillan, The Hill Times, and the Journal of Liberty and International Affairs, among others. Follow him on Twitter/X @WillBarclayBBC.

This article was originally published by RealClearPolitics and made available via RealClearWire.

Investigation by Jeremy Portnoy originally published by RealClearInvestigations and RealClearWire

Topline: Alejandro Mayorkas, head of the Department of Homeland Security under Joe Biden, was so generous with paid time off that t-shirts and collectible coins have declared him the “patron saint of administrative leave.”

During his four years, Mayorkas gave his employees more than six weeks in vacation time, at a cost to taxpayers of $3 billion, according to records reviewed by the Washington Times.

Key facts: All federal employees get 13 sick days and 11 paid holidays per year. They also receive 13 to 26 days of annual leave, depending on how many years they’ve been working.

Agency chiefs can also award up to 10 days of administrative leave per year, a practice Mayorkas used to its fullest. He gave each member of Homeland Security 269 hours of administrative leave while in office, which the Washington Times says is “likely a record for a single administration.”

Mayorkas gave his staff six days of administrative leave in 2021; another six days in 2022; nine days in 2023; and the maximum 10 days in 2024.

A few days before leaving office, he awarded three days to be used in 2025.

A Homeland Security employee could have potentially taken 60 paid days off in 2024, using their sick time, vacation time, paid leave and administrative leave. That would be the equivalent of working less than four days per week for the entire year.

Search all federal, state and local government salaries and vendor spending with the AI search bot, Benjamin, at OpenTheBooks.com.

Critical quote: One manager in Homeland Security told the Washington Times the administrative leave “creates a bookkeeping nightmare” because it is difficult to track. Sometimes, “the department must trust employees and hope they aren’t abusing the system,” he said.

Summary: Between excessive paid time off and the 94 percent of federal employees that work remotely at least part of the time, it’s fair to wonder if Washington officials are spending too much time relaxing on taxpayers’ dime.
__________

By Jeremy Portnoy – The #WasteOfTheDay is brought to you by the forensic auditors at OpenTheBooks.com

This article was originally published by RCI and made available via RealClearWire.

Democrats are increasingly becoming more aggressive in their attacks against President Trump and their hostile tone includes Elon Musk, head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

The attacks are being led by the top Democrats in Congress.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) participated in a “Nobody Elected Elon” rally outside the Treasury Building in Washington, D.C.

Schumer criticized Musk over his effort to cut government waste as the leader of DOGE.

Some on X mocked Schumer for his chant while holding hands with Democrat California Representative Maxine Waters.

ABC News reported on the rally which included hostile quotes from Democrat lawmakers.

Rep. Maxine Waters said, “We have got to tell Elon Musk, ‘Nobody elected your ass. Nobody told you you could get all of our private information. Nobody told you you could be in charge of the payments of this country.’”

Representative Ayanna Pressley went as far as calling Musk a “Nazi nepo baby.”

Democrat Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries urged resistance against the Trump agenda including, “…fight in the streets.”

Representative LaMonica McIver (D-NJ) seemed to take Jeffries encouragement for street fighting saying, “Shut down the city! We are at war!”

"Shut down the city! We are at war!" says Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-NJ) — days after Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries instructed his members to "fight" against President Trump's agenda "in the streets." pic.twitter.com/1hpa1joDT8

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) February 4, 2025

On MSNBC, Jeffries promised to mobilize Democrat supporters including lawyers to file lawsuits to stop Trump’s agenda.

Democrat governors are also part of the anti-Trump resistance.

The New York Times reported on a conference call with the governors and Schumer. According to the story, the Democrat governors pressured Schumer to do more to stop Trump including his nominations.

The story also included a social media strategy to counter Trump by Senator Corey Booker (D-NJ).

Last week, Mr. Booker delivered a PowerPoint presentation to fellow Democrats about how to deliver their message online. In the slides, which were obtained by The New York Times, Mr. Booker offered his colleagues guidance on how often to post on each platform. Instagram: once or twice a day. Facebook: once a day. LinkedIn: three to five times a week. X: two to five times a day. TikTok: one to four times a day.

The tone and style by Democrats reflects their desperation and it’s only going to escalate. Calling Musk a Nazi and concluding Democrats are engaged in a war is reckless and dangerous.

Democrats are ignoring the will of millions of Americans who voted for Trump and his America First agenda.

It’s a reminder that Democrats care more about power and not the people.

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) is under fire by President Trump and the agency is a top candidate for cost cutting under the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) headed by Elon Musk.

Politico is reporting almost all of the USAID’s employees are on leave, writing, “A person familiar with the situation said some 1,400 people will be notified Tuesday, on top of about 600 who were placed on leave starting Sunday night.”

President Kennedy initiated the idea of having an agency carry out financial support for foreign countries as a way to counter the Soviet Union and USAID was created following Congress passing the Foreign Assistance Act and Kennedy set up USAID in 1961.

The agency is a top target for cost cutting and is being accused of using taxpayer money to advance the left-wing agenda.

USAID is “run by radical lunatics,” said President Trump.

Donald Trump Jr. discussed some of the projects that USAID funded with Florida Republican Representative Brian Mast.

$2 million for sex changes in Guatemala

$6 million to fund “tourism” in Egypt

Millions to the EcoHealth Alliance (Wuhan Lab Leak)

$20 million on an Iraq Sesame Street show

And this is just the tip of the iceberg on the USAID scam pic.twitter.com/6RPmrQRxq2

— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) February 4, 2025

Unsurprisingly, Democrats are critical of the cost cutting effort at USAID by President Trump.

Minnesota Representative Ilhan Omar defended USAID and criticized Musk for focusing on the agency for cost cutting claiming the organization represents a small part of the federal budget.

House Speaker Mike Johnson also highlighted projects that USAID funded.

Here are just a few outrageous examples of how USAID mismanages our precious taxpayer dollars.

THIS is how Democrats want the government to spend your money.

It’s madness! House Republicans will work with the Trump Administration to eliminate wasteful spending and policies that… pic.twitter.com/UvfsS8ieK4

— Speaker Mike Johnson (@SpeakerJohnson) February 4, 2025

The wasteful spending by USAID highlights the way bureaucrats use taxpayer money to advance the left-wing agenda.

Democrats are outraged because it exposes wasteful spending by a bureaucracy that spreads their political agenda around the world.

Just this afternoon the Decision Desk HQ declared Republican David McCormick the winner of the US Senate election in Pennsylvania.

Decision Desk HQ projects David McCormick (R) wins the US Senate election in Pennsylvania.#DecisionMade: 2:25pm ET

Follow live results here:https://t.co/jw2B5WP4ly pic.twitter.com/Nrk81zyDUy

— Decision Desk HQ (@DecisionDeskHQ) November 14, 2024

On Newsmax TV, Pennsylvania Representative Dan Meuser said McCormick will be the new Senator for the state.

Dave McCormick will be sworn in as the next United States Senator from Pennsylvania. His 30,000-vote lead is insurmountable. There is no mathematical possibility in which a recount will change the results of the election. Bob Casey should do the right thing and concede. He cannot… pic.twitter.com/0nfOjCt3Ws

— Dan Meuser (@Meuser4Congress) November 14, 2024

News Nation reported on McCormick’s win noting Casey was the state’s longtime Senator after being elected in 2007. Republicans will now have 53 Senators while the Democrats will have 47 in the next Congress.

Dave McCormick is projected to win a U.S. Senate seat in Pennsylvania, according to NewsNation/Decision Desk HQ. The race, however, is headed for a statewide recount: https://t.co/6O45RJboe3 pic.twitter.com/FtBfDGTpCQ

— NewsNation (@NewsNation) November 14, 2024

Despite the decision by Decision Desk HQ, the race is going to undergo a recount. NBC News reported, “Secretary of the Commonwealth Al Schmidt announced Wednesday that the unofficial results showing a narrow race have led to a recount. Schmidt noted in his announcement that counties must begin the recount no later than Nov. 20 and that they must complete the process by noon Nov. 26. The results will not be published until Nov. 27.”

McCormick’s team feels his lead is too big for Casey to catch up and win the Senate seat.

President Elect Trump will have both the Senate and the House of Representatives in Republican hands to advance his agenda. Having McCormick in the Senate will help Trump overcome resistance from moderate Republicans in that chamber.

Investigation by Jeremy Portnoy originally published by RealClearInvestigations and RealClearWire

Topline: Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz accepted $890,000 in campaign donations from employees – including C-suite executives – ­of 434 state vendors between 2019 and 2022, a new report from OpenTheBooks found.

Those same companies collected nearly $15 billion in payments from the state between 2019 and 2023, according to the state checkbook.

Key facts: The donations all went to Walz’s campaign for reelection as governor of Minnesota and were made before he became the Democratic vice presidential nominee.

CEOs, presidents and other executives of 86 state vendors were among the donors.

Employees of law firm Blackwell Burke donated $4,750 to Walz’s gubernatorial campaign, campaign records show, and separately received almost $200,000 from the state. Co-founder Jerry Blackwell was one of the prosecutors who helped convict Derek Chauvin of murder for the death of George Floyd.

Ted Mondale, the head of new business development and government relations at computer consultants Atomic Data, donated $2,250 to Walz. His company separately received $169,310 from the state. Mondale is a former Democratic state senator and the son of Walter Mondale, a former U.S. Senator from Minnesota who also served as Jimmy Carter’s vice president.

Kinsale Communications received $160,583 in state spending, even though there’s few online records of the business even existing at all. President Steve Kinsella and his family members donated $3,000 to Walz’s campaign.

Other Walz campaign donors that received state business included Target, General Mills, Fortune 500 manufacturing company 3M, and bank chains like Wells Fargo and U.S. Bank.

Search all federal, state and local government salaries and vendor spending with the AI search bot, Benjamin, at OpenTheBooks.com.

Background: It’s nearly impossible to identify which, if any, of the transactions represent actual conflicts of interest.

The Minnesota checkbook contains only dollar values and a list of companies that received state money. The state ignored OpenTheBooks’ freedom of information request for details of each transaction, even though nearby states like Iowa, North Dakota and South Dakota were more transparent.

Walz finished his re-election campaign with more than $627,000 cash on hand as of Dec. 31, 2023. He cannot legally transfer the cash to the Harris-Walz campaign, but he theoretically could refund the contributions and ask donors to send the money back to the presidential ticket.

Summary: It’s likely that many Minnesota vendors would have received state business even without donating to Walz’s campaign — but if any are receiving preferential treatment, taxpayers deserve to know.
__________

By Jeremy Portnoy – The #WasteOfTheDay is brought to you by the forensic auditors at OpenTheBooks.com

This article was originally published by RealClearInvestigations and made available via RealClearWire.

Investigation by Jeremy Portnoy originally published by RealClearInvestigations and RealClearWire

Topline: The State of New York has spent $25.4 million to defend former Gov. Andrew Cuomo from sexual harassment lawsuits and criminal investigations over the last three years, The New York Times reported this month.

Key facts: More than half of the money was spent on four lawsuits in state and federal court. The rest was used to defend Cuomo against a state investigation into his alleged workplace misconduct and a recent House of Representatives investigation into the 15,000 deaths at New York nursing homes during the Covid-19 pandemic.

New York state law says taxpayer funds must be used for Cuomo’s defense because he was an elected official at the time.

The court cases are just one piece of the total taxpayer bill.

In 2021, the state attorney general released a report accusing Cuomo of sexually harassing at least 11 women. It cost the state $7.7 million to prepare, according to the Times.

Cuomo resigned following the report’s release but has maintained his innocence and says the attacks against him are politically motivated.

Had Cuomo not resigned, the State Assembly was ready to impeach him with the help of a private firm that earned $7 million to prepare a case against him, the Times found.

Search all federal, state and local government salaries and vendor spending with the AI search bot, Benjamin, at OpenTheBooks.com.

Critical quote: Valdi Licul, a lawyer representing one of the alleged victims, told the Times that the state could save money by settling the cases instead of trying to prove Cuomo’s innocence.

“The state has already found that these women were subjected to a hostile work environment,” Licul said. “Every state and federal agency that has looked at this has corroborated those findings. It’s mind-boggling that the state would now pay tens of millions of dollars in taxpayer money to try to defeat the victims here.”

Supporting quote: “We have a right to defend ourselves against baseless claims and uncover the facts that were hidden away in the political arena,” Rich Azzopardi, a spokesman for Cuomo, told the Times. “These cases have already started falling apart, and once they are entirely dismissed we fully intend to seek attorneys’ fees from the plaintiffs to reimburse the state.”

Summary: Cuomo certainly has the right to defend himself in court, but he should do it on his own dime.
__________

By Jeremy Portnoy – The #WasteOfTheDay is brought to you by the forensic auditors at OpenTheBooks.com

This article was originally published by RealClearInvestigations and made available via RealClearWire.