US has a $21 trillion underground network for only the wealthy to hide out in a ‘near-extinction event,' official says
The U.S. has built a secret underground 'city' costing $21 trillion where the ultra-wealthy can hide out druing a 'near- extinction event,' a former government official has claimed.
Catherine Austin Fitts, who served as the assistant secretary of Housing and Urban Development under president George H.W. Bush, made the shocking allegation on former Fox News host Tucker Carlson's podcast, according to Realtor.com.
A stunning $21 trillion in 'unauthorized spending' occurred in the department between 1998-2015, according to a 2017 report released by Michigan State University economist Mark Skidmore.
Skidmore's report had been prompted by Fitts referring 'to a report which indicated the Army had $6.5 trillion in unsupported adjustments, or spending, in fiscal 2015.'
'Given the Army's $122 billion budget, that meant unsupported adjustments were 54 times spending authorized by Congress. Typically, such adjustments in public budgets are only a small fraction of authorized spending,' the report noted.
While on 'The Tucker Carlson Show,' Fitts said she spent years investigating where the $21 trillion had gone – and discovered there were 170 secret underground bases across the U.S.
'One of the things I've looked at in the process of looking at where all this money is going is the underground base, city infrastructure, and transportation system that's been built,' she said.
'We have built an extraordinary number of underground bases and, supposedly, transportation systems,' including bases located below oceans, she claimed.
It was not immediately clear where the secret bunkers are located – or who among the elite might have access to them should disaster strike. It's also unknown the scope of the bunkers or the features of everyday life they include.
The bases would be used if a 'near-extinction event' were imminent – or for the government to carry out 'secret' projects, including a secret space program, Fitts claimed.
Carlson noted he assumed such bases would only exist in Washington, D.C., to be used in the case of a 'nuclear war,' to which Fitts responded: 'Some of it is. It's preparation for catastrophe.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NBC News
31 minutes ago
- NBC News
Transgender troops face a deadline and a difficult decision: Stay or go?
WASHINGTON — As transgender service members face a deadline to leave the U.S. military, hundreds are taking the financial bonus to depart voluntarily. But others say they will stay and fight. For many, it is a wrenching decision to end a career they love, and leave units they have led or worked with for years. And they are angry they are being forced out by the Trump administration's renewed ban on transgender troops. Active duty service members had until Friday to identify themselves and begin to leave the military voluntarily, while the National Guard and Reserve have until July 7. Then the military will begin involuntary separations. Friday's deadline comes during Pride Month and as the Trump administration targets diversity, equity and inclusion efforts, saying it's aiming to scrub the military of "wokeness" and reestablishing a "warrior ethos." "They're tired of the rollercoaster. They just want to go," said one transgender service member, who plans to retire. "It's exhausting." For others, it's a call to arms. "I'm choosing to stay in and fight," a noncommissioned officer in the Air Force said. "My service is based on merit, and I've earned that merit." The troops, who mainly spoke on condition of anonymity because they fear reprisals, said being forced to decide is frustrating. They say it's a personal choice based on individual and family situations, including whether they would get an infusion of cash or possibly wind up owing the government money. "I'm very disappointed," a transgender Marine said. "I've outperformed, I have a spotless record. I'm at the top of every fitness report. I'm being pushed out while I know others are barely scraping by." Some transgender troops decide to leave based on finances Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has said this is President Donald Trump's directive and what America voted for. The Pentagon, he said, is "leaving wokeness & weakness behind" and that includes "no more dudes in dresses." Sen. Tammy Duckworth of Illinois, a veteran, and 22 other Democratic senators have written to Hegseth urging him to allow transgender troops to keep serving honorably. Already, more than 1,000 service members have voluntarily identified themselves as transgender and are slated to begin leaving, according to rough Defense Department estimates. Defense officials say there are about 4,240 active duty transgender troops but acknowledge the numbers are fuzzy. For many, the decision is financial. Those who voluntarily leave will get double the amount of separation pay they would normally receive and won't have to return bonuses or tuition costs. Those who refuse to go could be forced to repay reenlistment or other bonuses as high as $50,000. That was the tipping point for Roni Ferrell, an Army specialist at Joint Base Lewis-McChord near Tacoma, Washington. Ferrell, 28, lives on base with her wife and two children and had planned to stay in the Army for at least another decade. But she said she felt "backed into a corner" to sign the voluntary separation agreement, fearing she would have to repay an $18,500 reenlistment bonus. "My commander basically said it was my only option in order to make sure my kids are taken care of," Ferrell said. The Marine, who has served for more than 25 years, said she had planned to stay and fight, but changed her mind. Lawyers, she said, told her an involuntary separation would put a code in her record saying she was forced to leave "in the interests of national security." That designation, she said, could mean those involuntarily separated could lose their security clearances, hurting future job prospects. In a statement Friday, a defense official said the code "is not intended" to trigger clearance revocations and that gender dysphoria is not a security reporting requirement, according to the director of national intelligence. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. Cynthia Cheng-Wun Weaver, senior director of litigation for Human Rights Campaign, said it's important for troops to talk with judge advocates general in their services to ensure they understand the different procedures being implemented. Other transgender troops plan to stay despite the ban The Air Force service member and a transgender officer in the Army National Guard both said they plan to stay and fight. Lawsuits over the ban continue and could change or block the policy. For troops involved in the court battles as plaintiffs, leaving voluntarily now would likely hurt their standing in the case. For others, it's simply dedication to their career. "I've really embraced military culture, and it's embraced me," the Air Force member said. "It's not about money. It's the career that I love." The Guard soldier echoed that sentiment, saying he will stay on "because it is important to me to serve. Frankly, I'm good at it, I'm well trained so I want to continue." Others without bonuses to repay or who have been in the military only a short while and won't get much in separation bonus pay may opt to stay and see what happens. National Guard troops face a particular problem National Guard members who are heading to their monthly drill weekend or annual two-week drill in June could be required to go but serve as the gender they were assigned at birth. That means they would have to wear uniforms and haircuts of that gender, use that bathroom and be referred to as "sir" or "ma'am" based on that gender. For many, that could be close to impossible and create uncomfortable situations. "If I were to show up to drill this weekend, I'd be expected to use all female facilities, I would be expected to wear a woman's uniform," said the Army Guard officer, who transitioned to male about five years ago and says others in his unit know him as a man. "I don't look like a woman. I don't feel like a woman. It would be disruptive to good order and discipline for me to show up and to tell my soldiers, you have to call me 'ma'am' now." It's not clear if Guard units are handling it all the same way, and it could be up to individual states or commanders. Some may allow troops to postpone the drill or go on administrative leave. What happens next for transgender troops? The service members interviewed by The Associated Press said they don't know what will happen once the deadline passes to leave voluntarily. Some believe that unit commanders will quickly single people out and start involuntary separations. Others say the process is vague, may involve medical review boards and could take months. The defense official said Friday that as the Pentagon takes these steps, it "will treat our service members with dignity and respect." Under Hegseth's directive, military commanders will be told to identify troops with gender dysphoria — when a person's biological sex does not match their gender identity — and send them to get medical checks to force them out of the service, defense officials have said. The order relies on routine annual health checks — so it could be months before that evaluation is scheduled. "My real big sticking point is that this administration's whole push is to reform this country based around merit, and that gender, race, etc., should have no factor in hiring," the Air Force service member said. "If that's true, I'm solely being removed for my gender, and merit is no longer a factor."
.jpg%3Ftrim%3D0%2C50%2C0%2C50%26width%3D1200%26height%3D800%26crop%3D1200%3A800&w=3840&q=100)
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Fox News rushes to Trump's defense after Elon Musk says he's ‘in the Epstein Files': What about Bill Clinton?!
Fox News suddenly found itself in a pickle on Thursday when a high-stakes feud erupted between the two leading lights of the MAGA universe – President Donald Trump and the world's richest man, Elon Musk. While the breakup always seemed inevitable due to the egos involved, as well as Trump's history of shedding one-time loyalists and stabbing them in the back on the way out, the hosts at the conservative cable giant have appeared to be in mourning over their two heroes duking it out. Since the spat exploded, the network's top MAGA personalities have been careful not to fully take a side, especially considering the media power Musk wields due to his control of the social media platform X. They've also expressed hope that the president and his former 'first buddy' will eventually work it out, essentially saying the two are 'just blowing off steam' like a couple of college bros. At the same time, though, there was one Rubicon that Musk crossed that was a bridge too far for many of Fox's opinion hosts – the loaded accusation that Trump was in the so-called 'Epstein Files' and this was 'the real reason' why the administration has yet to release them in full. During his off-the-rails tweetstorm on Thursday that escalated the war of words to nuclear levels, the Tesla CEO brought up the president's previous relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, the disgraced financier who killed himself in 2019 while awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges. Considering right-wing media's long-standing obsession with Epstein's supposed client list, which they've speculated would include a number of high-profile Democrats and celebrities who engaged in sex crimes with Epstein, the Musk allegation seemed primed to sow division within MAGA world. This has especially been the case since many of the president's supporters are still bitter over Attorney General Pam Bondi's botched release of the FBI's documents on Epstein and the FBI's leaders – who were Epstein conspiracists themselves when they were MAGA media figures – now saying Epstein actually committed suicide and wasn't murdered in jail. Sean Hannity, the Trump confidant who also serves as the 'White House shadow chief of staff,' was crestfallen that the back-and-forth between Trump and the one-time DOGE chief had grown so 'personal,' specifically with Musk's Epstein claims. Hannity, meanwhile, decided the best way to address the accusation was to pivot to another famous friend of Epstein's. 'Wasn't it Donald Trump who booted Epstein out… because he was one of the first people to realize just how horrible Epstein really was?' Hannity wondered, referencing the falling out between the president and the deceased sexual predator. 'I guess if Donald Trump felt that Epstein had something on him, he probably wouldn't have kicked him out of his club.' After insisting that Trump was fully in the clear when it came to his past ties with Epstein, Hannity then fully pivoted to former President Bill Clinton, who also associated with Epstein in the past. 'Now, Democrats and the media – I'm just thinking out loud here – I truly wonder, is Bill Clinton in those files also? If I was a betting man, I know where I'd put my money,' the Fox News star openly speculated. Hannity's primetime colleague Jesse Watters, meanwhile, took a slightly different tack when it came to the billionaire's shot at Trump. 'Elon's calling the president a pedophile. Wow! I don't think Musk has seen the Epstein Files and if Trump was in them, Biden probably would have released them,' Watters declared on Thursday night. 'And everyone knows that Trump kicked Epstein out of his clubs and cooperated with the victims' attorneys,' he continued. 'But the silver lining is that now Democrats are demanding the release of the Epstein Files.' Watters went on to say that it's up in the air if Musk and Trump will 'patch it up,' acknowledging that if someone 'said I was on the Epstein list, it might take me a little while' to get over it. At the same time, he insisted that 'guys get over stuff' easily and that 'both men are patriots and hopefully they will do the right thing.' Elsewhere on the network, afternoon host Will Cain was a bit more critical of the SpaceX founder, taking issue with his abrupt about-face and wondering why Musk was such a supporter of Trump if he believes he had nefarious dealings with Epstein in the past. 'Elon Musk is — he seems to be unstable right now on X. He is talking about impeachment. He is talking about the Epstein files, if I were to believe that would be true, why would Joe Biden not have used them in trying to get elected over Donald Trump?' Cain asserted. 'I hate it when people say this, but it's not a good look for Elon Musk.'Later on in his program, Cain said he wanted to ask Musk about his suggestion that Trump is 'in the Epstein Files,' wondering if the billionaire would have remained silent on it if the 'Big, Beautiful Bill' had met his satisfaction. 'What is this truth-teller today exposing about the guy yesterday, if everything is true that Elon is saying?' Cain added. Meanwhile, on the president's favorite morning show on Friday, the hosts made sure to let Trump know where their loyalties lay, at least when it came to Musk's Epstein claims. 'The Epstein file thing was way over the top and just crazy to say that Trump was in the Epstein files,' co-host Brian Kilmeade exclaimed. 'I mean, sometimes when people get drunk. They do crazy things. But this is a total escalation by Elon Musk.' Still, as was the case with much of Fox News programming over the past 24 hours, the curvy couch crew was trying not to explicitly take a side in the spat, seemingly waiting to see how it developed throughout the day and weekend. Instead, they mostly expressed hope that the two would eventually smooth things over for the good of the Republican Party, adopting the role many of Trump's allies have taken in trying to broker a Trump-Musk peace. 'Maybe I am a little too optimistic, but they're both alpha males,' Lawrence Jones insisted. 'They fight. It's dirty. I got a friend like this. I love him to death. But when we fight – I don't know what gets over us. We don't do it publicly, but we love each other.' This was similar to how Watters explained the situation the previous evening, likening the feud to a pair of fraternity bros who got into a brawl because of a love triangle. 'Guys sometimes will punch you in the face, and the next night you're having beer; sleep with your girlfriend, and you patch things up,' Watters bizarrely proclaimed at one point. Kilmeade, meanwhile, went on to praise Trump for his 'measured' response to Musk, all while claiming that the spending bill at the center of this blowup 'might actually get better because of Musk.' For now, though, the network's MAGA hosts continue to be a bit despondent over the entire affair, urging the two to 'knock it off' for the good of the country and that the whole situation makes them sad. And though many express optimism that Musk and Trump will make up, Laura Ingraham is worried that they may have already gone past a point of no return. 'I talked to an insider today who said it is irreparable,' she sighed on Thursday night.
The Independent
17 hours ago
- The Independent
Republican senators question cost of Army's parade spectacle set for Trump's birthday
Several Republican senators have questioned the cost of an upcoming military parade set to take place on President Donald Trump 's birthday. The parade is expected to be held in Washington, D.C., on June 14 to celebrate the Army's 250th birthday, which also happens to fall on Trump's 79th birthday. Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Roger Wicker, a Mississippi Republican, voiced his concern about the spectacle after he learned it would cost an estimated $25 million to $40 million, per Politico. According to the publication, Wicker heard about the hefty cost from Army Secretary Dan Driscoll in an Army budget hearing. Driscoll said he could not provide an exact price for the parade because the Army will also need to pay for the road damage that its tanks will do, Politico reported. NBC News reported, citing military officials, that it may cost as much as $16 million to repair the streets of Washington, D.C. after the parade. 'I would have recommended against the parade,' Wicker told Politico on Thursday. Wicker did mention a positive possible outcome of the planned spectacle: 'The secretary feels that it will be a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for thousands of young Americans to see what a great opportunity it is to participate in a great military force, that it will be a recruiting tool.' 'So, we'll see,' he added. The Army has already met its recruiting goals for the 2025 fiscal year. In a press release issued Tuesday, the Army announced it signed contracts with more than 61,000 future soldiers, four months before the end of the fiscal year. Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins, a Maine Republican, also critiqued the military parade. 'I'm glad that we're honoring the Army. I think that's really important to recognize such a significant anniversary,' she said in a recent interview with Politico. But 'the cost does seem a bit steep,' the Republican added. Senator Ron Johnson, a Wisconsin Republican, went a step further to tell Politico, 'If it costs money, I won't go.' The parade will feature roughly 6,600 Army troops who will wear uniforms from every military conflict the U.S. was involved in since the Revolutionary War. It will feature military equipment such as a WWII-vintage B-25 bomber, a P-1 fighter and Huey helicopters used in the Vietnam War, according to Politico. Reuters reported that, according to the Army, there will also be 25 M1 Abrams tanks, 28 Stryker armored vehicles, and four Paladin self-propelled artillery vehicles. In a May 4 interview on Meet the Press with NBC News' Kristen Welker, Trump said the cost of the parade is 'peanuts compared to the value of doing it.' 'We have the greatest missiles in the world. We have the greatest submarines in the world. We have the greatest army tanks in the world. We have the greatest weapons in the world. And we're going to celebrate it,' he said.
