For years, American taxpayers have unknowingly funded ideological crusades that have little to do with the nation’s interests and everything to do with advancing Leftist causes. One of the most egregious examples is the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and its financial entanglements with billionaire George Soros’ Open Society Foundations and Left-leaning media outlets that consistently push for gun-control policies.
Proponents argue that USAID projects serve U.S. strategic interests; however, we have learned that the agency was weaponized to support partisan initiatives—many of which undermined Americans’ constitutional rights, including the Second Amendment.
USAID: An Anti-Gun Money Pipeline?
USAID was originally designed to provide humanitarian assistance and to promote economic development abroad. Yet the agency veered into controversial partisan territory under the leadership of President Joe Biden (D)-appointed officials like Samantha Power. This agency’s funding programs soon went far Left.
On several occasions, Power met with representatives from the social-justice-focused Ford Foundation, the Left-wing Rockefeller Foundation and George Soros’ Open Society Foundations, raising questions about whether taxpayer dollars were being routed to politically motivated organizations. These high-level meetings highlight a troubling pattern in which government officials collaborated with ideological advocacy groups and big-dollar donors under the guise of humanitarian aid.
“The key thing to understand is that money is fungible. When USAID provides funding, the initial entry point may not be the final destination,” said John Thomas, managing director of the governance consulting firm Nest Point. “What often happens is that when money goes into a nonprofit, even if it is earmarked for a specific cause, it allows the organization to reallocate other funds toward different initiatives.”
Indeed, some of this money likely changed hands multiple times before it reached its destination—throwing watchdogs off along the way.
A key mechanism by which taxpayer money found its way to Soros and other related organizations was through an elaborate web of grants and intermediaries. The data now indicates that USAID might not have directly written fat checks to groups like Everytown for Gun Safety or the Open Society Foundations; instead, funds were likely funneled through multiple layers of nonprofit organizations, making it difficult to trace the full extent of government-backed anti-gun efforts.
Investigative reports have also found that USAID funds have been indirectly linked via umbrella groups to gun-control organizations, such as Everytown for Gun Safety and Giffords. Contributions were apparently funneled through intermediaries, such as the social-justice-oriented Tides Center and NEO Philanthropy, a group that likely functioned as a “middleman” to distribute taxpayer dollars to anti-gun groups. According to grant data accessed through DataRepublican.com, monies that originated from USAID went to various foundations and others that supported gun-control groups.
USAID’s Ties to Soros’ Open Society Foundations
The connection between USAID and Soros’ Open Society Foundations runs deep. Several former USAID officials now hold senior roles within Open Society initiatives. This revolving door likely allowed a flow of taxpayer dollars into programs that advance the Soros agenda, which are often at odds with core American values.
According to Max Primorac, former acting chief operating officer at USAID, the agency and Open Society frequently co-funded programs that promoted progressive policies in developing nations. This relationship has been ongoing for decades, with Open Society Foundations listing USAID as a “donor partner” as far back as 2001.
The scope of their collaboration was exposed through two U.S. Supreme Court cases in which an Open Society nonprofit sued USAID over funding conditions. The cases bring the ideological alignment between the two entities to the forefront, reinforcing the argument that USAID has operated as a conduit for propelling the Open Society agenda rather than serving American taxpayers.
Thomas explained that the wording of the grants was so opaque that when organizations received the USAID funds, they could then shift the money to other projects.
“As Elon Musk has pointed out, in some cases, this kind of funding could have even ended up supporting groups with more controversial agendas because there was no strict oversight,” said Thomas. “These large nonprofits operated knowing there would be little to no government scrutiny, and bureaucrats who aligned ideologically with them would deliberately avoid asking questions.”
Buying Influence Against the Second Amendment
Beyond funding activist organizations, USAID also funneled taxpayer dollars to media outlets that consistently advocate for gun-control measures. This raises concerns about the role of government influence in shaping public opinion and controlling the narrative around Second Amendment rights.
For instance, publicly available records indicate that USAID paid Politico $44,000 in 2023 and 2024 for institutional subscriptions. This, however, is a fraction of the broader funding picture: Since 2014, Politico has received over $34 million from various federal agencies. This calls into question the independence of Politico, which purports to provide unbiased political coverage, but that is consistently opposed to American’s Second Amendment-protected rights.
Politico is hardly alone. USAID and other federal agencies have also financially supported a range of media organizations, from the Associated Press to The New York Times, that routinely promote gun control while marginalizing pro-Second Amendment perspectives. By shelling out taxpayer dollars to outlets that align with far-Left narratives, USAID contributed to a media ecosystem in which mainstream-media editorializing systematically leaned against gun rights.
“This is the same issue we see with nonprofit funding—money is fungible. Even if the government is just purchasing subscriptions, that revenue supports the entire organization, including the journalists covering Capitol Hill,” said Thomas. “To claim that there is no conflict of interest is absurd.”
This practice raises serious ethical concerns. Journalistic integrity demands transparency, particularly when news organizations receive direct or indirect government funding. Yet, there has been little disclosure about the extent of these financial relationships, leaving readers unaware of the potential conflicts of interest.
When government-backed media consistently pushes a single perspective, it results in a one-sided public discourse. In this case, these taxpayer funds incentivized calls for further gun control while suppressing counterarguments in defense of firearm ownership and Second Amendment-protected rights. To put it another way, the blending of federal funding and media influence threatened the core principles of a free press, turning supposedly independent journalism into tools for advancing some policies—including restrictions on gun rights.
The fact that so many of these members of the media pretend to stand on some higher moral ground as they push “gun safety” (a term they use as a synonym for “gun control”) and quote unnamed government sources even as their corporate-owned media companies quietly take money from the government brings them to a new low. Trust for the media has already fallen precipitously. This latest revelation risks a further weakening of a vocation that should be unearthing the truth to keep government officials careful.
The Struggle With Oversight
What makes this even more worrisome is the lack of oversight this taxpayer funding received.
According to multiple reports from the Office of the Inspector General (OIG), USAID repeatedly failed to implement adequate oversight mechanisms. OIG audits have highlighted systemic weaknesses in financial tracking. A 2023 OIG report found that USAID lacked sufficient controls to prevent funds from being diverted to unauthorized programs, which raises concerns that U.S. taxpayer dollars were funneled into ideological initiatives. An inability to track expenditures effectively undermined accountability and increased the risk of fraud and misuse.
The revelation that USAID likely financed efforts to undermine the Second Amendment, even if indirectly, is yet another example of taxpayer money being weaponized against American citizens. Rather than focusing on its intended mission of foreign aid and development, the agency instead became a conduit for far-Left political activism.
Under the Biden administration, Open Society-aligned groups—many of which receive backing from billionaire George Soros—were able to embed their ideological agenda within the federal government. These groups leveraged taxpayer-funded grants and media partnerships to drive policies that many argue are radical and unconstitutional. By redirecting government resources to advocacy groups that promote gun control, censorship and other progressive priorities, the Biden administration effectively blurred the line between governance and political activism.
This entrenched system allowed a well-connected network of far-Left foundations, government agencies and media organizations to shape public policy in favor of gun control and other restrictive measures. By controlling the stream of information and shaping public opinion through strategic bolstering of media outlets and activist groups, these institutions were able to promote their agenda while stifling dissenting voices.
The lack of monitoring and candor in USAID’s spending underscores a deeper issue: The government used taxpayer dollars to bankroll political activism that many Americans oppose. Instead of serving the laws and values of the American people, federal funds were funneled into ideological campaigns designed to undermine constitutionally protected freedoms.
This dramatically contrasts President Donald Trump’s (R) efforts to suspend foreign funding through USAID, which has subsequently disrupted this network of far-Left activism. His administration has been working to refashion the agency, expand oversight and cut off money to organizations that actively work against American interests. These moves delivered a significant setback to Soros-linked endeavors.
For those who cherish their constitutional rights, insisting on transparency and reform is the only way to guarantee that their tax dollars are not being weaponized against them. With the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and many private watchdog organizations continuing their investigations into these uses of taxpayer dollars, the full extent of the government’s covert efforts against the Second Amendment may soon be revealed.
