The White House delivered a fierce rebuttal after actor Richard Gere criticized the Trump administration for discontinuing the USAID program, which he described as one of America’s purest initiatives to help those in need.

Gere made his remarks during a recent Associated Press interview while promoting season two of his Paramount Plus series, The Agency.

Rather than limiting the conversation to his spy drama, Gere launched into a political critique of Trump, focusing on immigration, Israel policy, and the end of USAID.

His comments once again drew sharp responses from administration officials.

Here's What They're Not Telling You About Your Retirement

In his interview, Gere lamented the program’s termination, saying, “USAID was probably the most pure thing America did up to that moment. It was a giveaway program to needy people. He stopped that day one. It was insane. He wouldn’t even know what it stands for, USAID. He has idiots around him who have the same ignorance about it.”

WATCH:

The White House’s Rapid Response team reacted swiftly on X, issuing a scathing response to the actor’s remarks.

FREE Gun Law Map: Laws Don't Pause During Social Unrest

The post mocked Gere’s defense of USAID, framing the program as wasteful and politically charged.

“What will the world do without millions for Guatemalan sex changes or DEI in Serbia? Because that’s the type of bullshit USAID was funding,” the account stated, adding: “It was a slush fund for Radical Left activists to enrich themselves and undermine America’s interests.”

Their message underscored the administration’s view that USAID had long misused taxpayer dollars in ways that failed to serve critical American goals.

Officials portrayed its elimination as a decisive move toward fiscal and political accountability.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio also addressed the matter directly, sharing data that he said illustrated USAID’s inefficiency.

He asserted that only a small portion of its massive budget actually reached people in need.

“At USAID, 12 cents of every dollar was reaching the recipient,” Rubio said.

“That means that in order for us to get aid to somebody, we had to spend all this other money supporting this foreign aid industrial complex.”

Rubio elaborated on the administration’s plan to reform how foreign aid would be delivered going forward.

He maintained that future aid efforts would focus on results over bureaucracy.

“We’re going to find more efficient ways to deliver aid to people directly,” he said.

“It’s going to be directed by our regional bureaus. It’s going to sponsor programs that make a difference. And it’s going to be part of a holistic approach to our foreign policy.”

WATCH:

The exchange exemplified the long-running tension between Hollywood figures and the Trump administration, with Gere’s criticism fitting a familiar pattern of celebrity opposition.

The White House, in turn, used the confrontation as an opportunity to argue that public funds had too often been squandered through politically motivated programs abroad.

Gere’s comments also reflected his broader pattern of outspoken political engagement.

Over the years, he has frequently used interviews and public appearances to voice opposition to Trump’s policies, particularly on humanitarian and international issues.

For the administration, however, USAID’s elimination was positioned as a necessary adjustment.

Officials framed it not as a withdrawal from humanitarian engagement but as a restructuring meant to ensure greater accountability and direct impact.

The rhetorical clash between Gere and the White House attracted broad attention online, as political supporters and critics alike weighed in on social media.

Many posts mirrored the polarized reactions, either praising Gere for speaking out or cheering the administration’s sharp rebuttal.

In this ongoing debate, both sides revisited larger themes about the proper role of U.S. aid spending and how America manages its international commitments.

The discussion illuminated the deep political divide over what constitutes effective foreign assistance and how much cultural or ideological influence should shape it.

While Gere’s comments aimed to highlight the compassion he associated with USAID, the administration countered by accusing its defenders of ignoring inefficiencies and ideological favoritism.

Warning: Account balances and purchasing power no longer tell the same story. Know in 2 minutes if your retirement is working for you.

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of RVM News. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.