White House Clashes with Richard Gere Over USAID Shutdown

During a recent media stop in Berlin – where Gere was promoting the second season of his Paramount+ series “The Agency” – the veteran actor took a hard turn toward U.S. foreign‑policy. In an interview with the Associated Press he said, “USAID was probably the most pure thing America did up to that moment,” and went on to admit he felt “ashamed” that President Trump had ordered the agency’s shutdown on his first day back in office.

Gere, now 76, has been using his press tour to pepper criticism of the Trump administration on a range of issues, from immigration to the war in Gaza. His remarks about USAID were the latest salvo, and they landed squarely in the White House’s inbox.

Steven Cheung, the White House communications director, answered the actor’s barbs on the administration’s X account (formerly Twitter). Rather than engage with the substance of Gere’s praise for USAID’s humanitarian work, Cheung simply dismissed the criticism, calling it “misguided” and urging the public to focus on the agency’s alleged wasteful spending.

That “wasteful spending” line isn’t new. Since taking office, the Trump team has repeatedly painted USAID as a conduit for projects they deem ideologically driven – ranging from LGBTQ‑focused grants in Guatemala to diversity programs in Serbia and other nations. The White House’s rapid‑response X feed has spotlighted a handful of such initiatives, framing them as examples of a “slush fund” for left‑wing causes.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio, a staunch ally of the president, has echoed that sentiment, labeling the agency a “political sandbox” that siphons American dollars into projects with little strategic value. In his view, cutting USAID is part of a broader effort to streamline foreign‑aid spending.

Gere, however, counters that narrative with a more humanitarian lens. He highlighted USAID’s role in combating global health crises, supporting vaccination drives, and delivering food aid in conflict zones – work he says has saved countless lives over the decades.

The back‑and‑forth has spilled onto social media, with supporters of the administration tweeting memes that mock Gere’s Hollywood pedigree, while advocacy groups rally in defense of the agency, urging Congress to restore funding.

At its core, the dispute reflects a deeper ideological divide: whether U.S. aid abroad should be guided by strategic interests first, or by a moral imperative to help those in need. As the debate rages, the fate of USAID – and the millions it serves – hangs in the balance.

For now, the White House appears content to let the controversy fade, focusing instead on rolling out its new foreign‑policy priorities. Whether Gere’s criticism will echo louder in the halls of Capitol Hill remains to be seen.