You can't equate taking USAID funds with being a WEF member. Charlie bleeds red, white, and, blue, and I can't think of anyone working harder for the MAGA cause.
Hindsight is 20/20. Of course, it would be immoral for any American-loving agency to apply for USAID funds today. But three years ago, when this grant and the accompanying funds were issued, it was simply a good business decision to apply, not so different from taking advantage of the tax loopholes Trump himself spoke of during his first presidential debate. FOUL BALL.
The point of controlled opposition is that they fit in and build your trust. They’re allowed to fight and win all the battles they can, except for the select few that really matter. At that point, when it really matters, you find out they’re not really on your side.
A great example is Fox News. They have been the outlet fighting liberalism for decades. But when they were ordered to be the first to call Arizona for Biden on Election night 2020, they didn’t skip a beat. The establishment then used Fox’s “credibility” as a right wing staple as an excuse to justify the pile-on and to attack opponents. CNN can now claim they’re not biased because even Fox News is calling it.
I don’t know much about Charlie, and have liked the few things I’ve seen him do online. But receiving this funding is a bad sign.
I wouldn't blame anyone for applying for free money. That's just stupid. Go apply for all the welfare you possibly can, it's never wrong to receive it. I was able to get my kids in medi-cal during COVID because they changed the income limits and then wouldn't cancel any policy for years. They are stupid and crooks, but I will never get back more money than they take from me. Take every benefit you can because you already paid for it.
It's not hypocrisy to take grants and welfare while saying the programs shouldn't exist.
Some orgs are bad & take funding from USAID directly. Other NGOs receive funding from different funders who pass on money they took from the government. Sometimes 2 steps away. Read the datarepublican’s explanation of how to read the data.
“🔍 HOW TO READ THE DATA: TURNING POINT DOES NOT RECEIVE USAID DOLLARS
USAID grant money is everywhere. It’s so deeply woven into the nonprofit world that tracing it is like testing $100 bills for cocaine—at a certain scale, every charity has some residue.
That’s why the disclaimer at the top of the website exists:
**"NOTE: Funding is fungible, meaning USAID dollars do not directly flow into these NGOs in a literal sense. Instead, the money moves through multiple layers, with various entities handling and redistributing it.
Rather than focusing solely on individual grants or making definitive statements about how NGOs benefit from USAID, it’s more important to recognize the broader pattern of funding distribution and influence—and to cut through the layers of unaccountability."**
So, how do you determine if an NGO is truly dependent on USAID money? Context matters.
Let’s go back to the cocaine analogy: Every $100 bill has trace amounts, but a drug dealer’s cash will be covered in it. The same logic applies here.
🔹 Look at the graph on the left. That’s Defending Democracy Together Institute, Bill Kristol’s group. Over half of their funding comes from major grants. That’s a lot of cocaine.
🔹 Now, compare it to Turning Point USA on the right. Their USAID connections are multiple hops away and bottlenecked by the smallest possible intermediary grants. Even with the most extreme assumptions, only 0.2% of their funding could possibly come from this path.
This isn’t just theory for me. I worked with Charlie Kirk during the 2024 election on early voting analysis. I saw firsthand how his operation worked, and I can say with confidence: President Trump would not have won re-election without him. He flipped voter registrations on their head and made a direct push for young male voters.
Bottom line: These graphs are tools, not verdicts. Use them wisely.”
Easy frens. It is an old school DS tactic. Taint the opposition just enough without their knowledge to say everyone does it, when they are caught. Always trust but verify. So far, he has built up a lot of atta-boys and only a few ah-shits.
Are we sure this is not just an excerpt from a company DB?
I have used similar databases to do research in client acquisition. I know from every company I contact how much profit they make, how many workers they have and their bank account balance.
In other words; this compensation, is it paid by USAID or is it the documentation USAID has on TP USA?
You can't equate taking USAID funds with being a WEF member. Charlie bleeds red, white, and, blue, and I can't think of anyone working harder for the MAGA cause.
Hindsight is 20/20. Of course, it would be immoral for any American-loving agency to apply for USAID funds today. But three years ago, when this grant and the accompanying funds were issued, it was simply a good business decision to apply, not so different from taking advantage of the tax loopholes Trump himself spoke of during his first presidential debate. FOUL BALL.
Controlled opposition? The person that worked his ass off going to college campuses to destroy liberals and get students to vote maga? Right.
The point of controlled opposition is that they fit in and build your trust. They’re allowed to fight and win all the battles they can, except for the select few that really matter. At that point, when it really matters, you find out they’re not really on your side.
A great example is Fox News. They have been the outlet fighting liberalism for decades. But when they were ordered to be the first to call Arizona for Biden on Election night 2020, they didn’t skip a beat. The establishment then used Fox’s “credibility” as a right wing staple as an excuse to justify the pile-on and to attack opponents. CNN can now claim they’re not biased because even Fox News is calling it.
I don’t know much about Charlie, and have liked the few things I’ve seen him do online. But receiving this funding is a bad sign.
I wouldn't blame anyone for applying for free money. That's just stupid. Go apply for all the welfare you possibly can, it's never wrong to receive it. I was able to get my kids in medi-cal during COVID because they changed the income limits and then wouldn't cancel any policy for years. They are stupid and crooks, but I will never get back more money than they take from me. Take every benefit you can because you already paid for it.
It's not hypocrisy to take grants and welfare while saying the programs shouldn't exist.
Some orgs are bad & take funding from USAID directly. Other NGOs receive funding from different funders who pass on money they took from the government. Sometimes 2 steps away. Read the datarepublican’s explanation of how to read the data.
“🔍 HOW TO READ THE DATA: TURNING POINT DOES NOT RECEIVE USAID DOLLARS USAID grant money is everywhere. It’s so deeply woven into the nonprofit world that tracing it is like testing $100 bills for cocaine—at a certain scale, every charity has some residue.
That’s why the disclaimer at the top of the website exists:
**"NOTE: Funding is fungible, meaning USAID dollars do not directly flow into these NGOs in a literal sense. Instead, the money moves through multiple layers, with various entities handling and redistributing it.
Rather than focusing solely on individual grants or making definitive statements about how NGOs benefit from USAID, it’s more important to recognize the broader pattern of funding distribution and influence—and to cut through the layers of unaccountability."**
So, how do you determine if an NGO is truly dependent on USAID money? Context matters.
Let’s go back to the cocaine analogy: Every $100 bill has trace amounts, but a drug dealer’s cash will be covered in it. The same logic applies here.
🔹 Look at the graph on the left. That’s Defending Democracy Together Institute, Bill Kristol’s group. Over half of their funding comes from major grants. That’s a lot of cocaine.
🔹 Now, compare it to Turning Point USA on the right. Their USAID connections are multiple hops away and bottlenecked by the smallest possible intermediary grants. Even with the most extreme assumptions, only 0.2% of their funding could possibly come from this path.
This isn’t just theory for me. I worked with Charlie Kirk during the 2024 election on early voting analysis. I saw firsthand how his operation worked, and I can say with confidence: President Trump would not have won re-election without him. He flipped voter registrations on their head and made a direct push for young male voters.
Bottom line: These graphs are tools, not verdicts. Use them wisely.”
https://x.com/datarepublican/status/1888438050231103559?s=61
Easy frens. It is an old school DS tactic. Taint the opposition just enough without their knowledge to say everyone does it, when they are caught. Always trust but verify. So far, he has built up a lot of atta-boys and only a few ah-shits.
TURNING POINT USAID
Are we sure this is not just an excerpt from a company DB?
I have used similar databases to do research in client acquisition. I know from every company I contact how much profit they make, how many workers they have and their bank account balance.
In other words; this compensation, is it paid by USAID or is it the documentation USAID has on TP USA?
Post the source. These scumbags taking our money, shame on them...
Nope. Wrong.
In Wisconsin especially, I hope that TPA and RPW destroy each other fighting for power over the will of the people!