🧵🚨 Hidden UN App Preinstalled on Samsung Phones: Your Tax Dollars at Work
Thank you @MrsDrLinda for the tip.
Did you know your Samsung phone might be quietly running a United Nations app you didn't ask for?
It's called Samsung Global Goals, and it's preinstalled by default on some Samsung Galaxy devices. Yes, really.
Let’s break it down. 👇
The app promotes the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) like global redistribution, "climate and environmental degradation," and "inequality."
It was developed by Samsung, but in direct partnership with the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).
It's their agenda, on your phone.
The UNDP is funded heavily by government aid, and that includes your money. 💸 @DOGE_STATE hasn't cancelled all of its spending.
In Q1 of 2025, the U.S. government gave $88 million to UNDP. Many awards are still outstanding.
UNDP holds active funding awards from dozens of governments, including the U.S., UK, Canada, and EU.
It's not a neutral charity. It's a publicly funded international bureaucracy with ideological goals, installed on consumer devices by default.
The Samsung-UNDP partnership launched in 2019.
The app now appears on hundreds of millions of Samsung phones without user consent.
It can't be fully removed. It's bundled in the factory firmware.
Samsung even matches donations made through the app’s built-in ad platform.
The UNDP, the same agency who pulled in $88M of your money in Q1 2025 is the beneficiary.
Your privacy AND your taxpayer money are being sacrificed to finance left-wing NGOs.
Again.
The UNDP's total 2025 budget is in the billions, and it's being used to push UN-aligned political messaging into every device that ships with a Galaxy logo.
Ask yourself:
🔹Who gave Samsung the green light to push UN talking points to U.S. consumers?
🔹Why does the UNDP need your tax dollars and your phone to spread its leftist agenda?
🔹Why isn't this opt-in?
Accountability and transparency shouldn't be optional.
📲 Check your Samsung device.
Go to your app drawer > look for "Global Goals."
Now you know where it came from, and who's behind it.
Comments on this thread are saying that the app reinstalls itself after updates!
Please share this thread and put pressure on @SamsungMobileUS .
Hundreds of millions of people should not be participants in a privacy-stealing, ad-earning firmware designed to push leftist ideology.
And while we're at it, let's cut all financing for UNDP, @DOGE_STATE .
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Completely independent of tariffs, we need to have a frank conversation about why so many seniors are financially dependent on the stock market, especially when fixed-interest instruments are have been offering attractive yields.
This is the kind of investment advice that was common in my 20s:
Note, I am not a financial expert and I don't endorse this model. Just giving this as an example.
The point is, the stock market was always depicted as a high-risk investment and you were supposed to reduce your exposure to high-risk investments by age.
Which is why the amount of exposure of seniors have to the market is confusing.
📊 ANALYSIS: Is there a last minute 🔴 red surge? 🗳️
One of the big questions today: have Republicans regained momentum heading into Election Day? We can’t answer that definitively for Wisconsin, but early Florida numbers offer some insight.
So far, here’s how it looks:
✅ Early voting in FL's CD-1 and CD-6 broke down to: 🔴 51.0% Republican
🔵 34.8% Democrat
➡️ R advantage: +16.2%
📅 In the 2024 cycle, Election Day votes have tended to lean about 6% redder than early votes.
🔴 As of this morning, Election Day voting is breaking: 🔴 57.79% Republican
🔵 26.19% Democrat
➡️ R advantage: +31.6%, or 15.4% redder than early vote
⚠️ Caveats: It’s still early in the day, special elections don’t draw many independents, and we expect that R+31.6% margin to narrow as more ballots come in.
🧮 Turnout is key: In 2024, Election Day made up about 22% of the Florida vote. Right now, there are 15,605 Election Day votes, which is 7.6% of early vote totals.
For GOP momentum to look real, that number would need to hit ~53,646.
Bottom line:
We may or may not be seeing late Republican momentum—but we definitely aren’t seeing a Democratic one.
TL;DR: Keep watching the total Election Day votes on the live Florida map. If we exceed ~53,646 Election Day votes, we may be seeing a last minute momentum for Republicans. datarepublican.com/florida/
So, two days ago, the doxxing website DOGEQUEST, primed by an article by the @sltrib, slapped my husband’s distillery front and center in an attempt to intimidate and silence me.
To be honest, it did get me down.
And … congratulations, they might have achieved their goal. We might just have to shutter the whole operation…
… because my husband just now notified me our entire inventory got nearly cleared out in 48 hours flat. His multi-year productions, all of which he personally oversaw and toiled over. All bought out in the blink of an eye.
Terrorists lose this round.
And I have a great feeling that this is going to similarly backfire against @Tesla .
There is a miraculous element to this, IMHO.
We had been trying many months to sell our product online with little success.
It is not a coincidence of the Lord that we finally went online, just one day after he got doxxed in the worst way possible by a viral website.
I pray that every patriot takes encouragement from this.
Looks like my husband has *just* changed it up to offer the actual storefront stock now because it’s not out of stock anymore, get it while it’s hot!
💎 DUPLICATE SMALL DOLLAR DONATIONS IN KANSAS LOCAL RACES
Following the discovery of @matt_vanswol’s report on fraudulent donations in Kansas, I analyzed four local candidates’ filings. I uncovered 13 donors who each made identical donations to the same candidate on the same date—10 of these donors were from out of state. These same contributors also appeared across most of the nine candidates that Mr. Van Swol donated to, but I focused on these four reports.
Here are the names I found which appeared across all 4 reports. All dates and amounts were same:
🔷 Benjamin k Hand, 10/10/20, $2.00/$1.00, CA
🔷 Chia Yuan Hung, 10/10/20, $1.00, NY
🔷 Dawn Hoffman, 10/10/20, $1.00, FL
🔷 Elaina Rose, 10/10/20, $10.00, WA
🔷 Jennifer Forbes, 10/10/20, $2.00, KS
🔷 Kathleen Newman, 08/04/20, $32.00, KS
🔷 Margaret Pisciotta, 09/18/20, $4.00, KS
🔷 Martha Teitelbaum, 10/10/20, $1.00, MD
🔷 Matthew Van Swol, 09/01/20, $2.00, NC
🔷 Rena Korb, 10/10/20, $1.00, CA
🔷 Ryan Ward, 10/10/20, $1.00, CA
🔷 Tamir Avital, 10/10/20, $4.00, CA
🔷 Teresa Lewis-Hutson, 09/02/20, $1.00, MO
Receipts follow.
@matt_vanswol Here are where you can download the donation reports for the campaign cycle:
Three additional MAGA X influencers got swatted today: @Beard_Vet , @matt_vanswol , @GrageDustin .
I used Grok to compile the following list of swatting victims and then ran it through both Grok and OpenAI’s deep research tools to find common patterns.
I also used AI to analyze who wasn’t swatted, to identify differentiating factors. Finally, I attempt to identify the next high priority targets. Thread follows. 👇
@Beard_Vet @matt_vanswol @GrageDustin The top AI identifying factor among swatted victims: association with @elonmusk , and/or prominence in alt-media such as InfoWars or War Room.
Documenting receipts (sorry, this will be slow):
@Beard_Vet @matt_vanswol @GrageDustin @elonmusk . @JoeTalkShow is a big fan of Elon:
The question is not whether such awards exist—I have already acknowledged that they do. The issue at hand is not a matter of finding a counter-example and declaring the metric validated. The real question is which heuristic is more accurate: relying on "current award value" or assuming that contractors typically spend up to their maximum authority.
The scale of relevant awards is vast—tens of thousands exceed $1 million and collectively amount to trillions. In contrast, you have cited only a few dozen exceptions. You are not providing not a refutation; you prove to have a fundamental misunderstanding of how heuristic correctness is determined.
Historically and consistently, contractors spend to their maximum authority. Given this reality, the most accurate heuristic for estimating savings is to use potential award value.
I trust this clarifies the point.
In my initial run, which processed the first 60,000 rows, I did not find these awards—my hard drive overheated long before I could complete a full pass through the database. In a later run, which I referenced in another post, I did identify two such awards. That discrepancy is a matter of sampling size, not an issue with the query itself.
I’ll now attempt a full run, which should capture the awards you found.
Running on the full dataset now and I think it'll complete this time! Found a bug which underestimated the number of awards that ended under their potential value, but also underestimated the number of awards that ended OVER their potential value. And