Featured

Home Featured
Featured posts

Supreme Court Justices Targets of Assassination by Left-wing Abortion Extremists: Alito

    3
    Duncan Lock, Dflock, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

    ANALYSIS – Following the first-ever leak of a pending Supreme Court decision, left-wing abortion extremists have threatened the lives of the conservative justices.

    First by calling for violence and posting their personal details online, then by having daily aggressive protests at their homes.

    The threats even extended to their families and children.

    There was also a specific assassination attempt against Justice Brett Kavanaugh in June when an armed man, Nicholas John Roske, 26, traveled across the country to Justice Kavanaugh’s home to kill him.

    In that case, the U.S. Marshals discovered Roske had a “black tactical chest rig and tactical knife,” a pistol with two magazines and ammunition, pepper spray, zip ties, a hammer, a screwdriver, a nail punch, a crowbar, a pistol light and duct tape, in addition to other items, according to the affidavit. 

    The affidavit noted that his plan was to break into the house, kill the justice and then kill himself.

    And the threats to the court continue.

    These events are unprecedented in the history of the Supreme Court and have been dutifully ignored by the establishment media, Joe Biden and the Democrats.

    In a letter to Biden’s Attorney General Merrick Garland, attorneys general from 19 states write, “charities that support pregnant mothers in need have been firebombed and pro-life organizations have been attacked almost daily and terrorized.”

    They then urge him to investigate the barrage of threats and attacks made against pro-life judges and pro-life organizations.

    Instead, the left focus endlessly on how conservatives are ‘extremists’ and a danger to democracy.

    They also blather endlessly about MAGA ‘election deniers’ while ignoring all those on the left who now deny the legitimacy of the Supreme Court.

    So, as we near the critical midterm election, it is time to remind voters of who the dangerous violent extremists really are.

    As Newsmax reported:

    Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito said this week that the leaking of a draft decision to overturn Roe v. Wade put the lives of him and his fellow justices at risk.

    “It was a grave betrayal of trust by somebody,” Alito said at a public interview with the Heritage Foundation on Tuesday, according to The New York Times. “It was a shock, because nothing like that had happened in the past. It certainly changed the atmosphere at the court for the remainder of last term.”

    He went on to say, “The leak also made those of us who were thought to be in the majority in support of overruling Roe and Casey targets for assassination because it gave people a rational reason to think they could prevent that from happening by killing one of us.”

    Alito also hit out at those who question the court’s legitimacy following the decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.

    “Everybody in this country is free to disagree with our decisions,” he said. “Everybody is free to criticize our reasoning, and in strong terms. And that certainly is done in the media, in writings of law professors and on social media.”

    “But to say the court is exhibiting lack of integrity is something quite different,” he added. “That goes to character.”

    Justice Alito authored the draft and final opinion that reversed the poorly reasoned Roe v. Wade decision that created a non-existing constitutional right to abortion.

    He is part of the 6-3 conservative majority on the Supreme Court.

    So, whenever the left screams about ‘violent right-wing extremists,’ or ‘election deniers’ being a threat to democracy, remind them of the left-wing violence against pro-life centers and churches, the assassination attempt against a conservative Supreme Court Justice and all those who now deny the legitimacy of our nation’s highest court. 

    Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.

    Larry Hogan Announces Senate Campaign

      0
      Maryland GovPics, CC BY 2.0 via Wikimedia Commons

      On Friday, anti-Trump Republican Larry Hogan announced he’s running to fill Maryland’s empty Senate seat.

      The Maryland Republican’s decision to run for outgoing Sen. Ben Cardin’s (D-Md.) seat was unexpected given that he’d previously hinted at launching a White House campaign to take on Donald Trump.

      According to The Hill, Hogan is likely to be the heavy favorite on the Republican side while Democrats are likely to choose between Rep. David Trone (D-Md.) and Prince George’s County Executive Angela Alsobrooks (D).  

      The decision came after intense lobbying from the National Republican Senatorial Committee and its Chair Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.). Hogan had also spoken to Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) in recent months.

      Hillary Clinton Peddles Claim MAGA Supporters Have a Plan to ‘Literally Steal the Next Presidential Election’

        14
        Hillary Clinton via Gage Skidmore Flickr

        Hillary Clinton is already spreading fake news.

        The former Democrat 2016 presidential nominee and Trump rival is wasting no time before starting to spread more insidious misinformation weeks before the midterms conclude and Americans officially begin looking toward the next presidential election. Clinton claims “right wing extremists” already have a plan in place to “literally steal” an election for which there are no official candidates.

        In a message made for anti-Trump group, Indivisible, Clinton called out the “right wing” threats.

        According to their website, the organization is a “grassroots movement of thousands of local Indivisible groups with a mission to elect progressive leaders, rebuild our democracy, and defeat the Trump agenda.”

        “I know we’re all focused on the 2022 midterm elections, and they are incredibly important, but we also have to look ahead because, you know what, our opponents certainly are. Right-wing extremists already have a plan to literally steal the next presidential election, and they’re not making a secret of it,” Clinton said in the video according to Mediaite.

        At issue for the former presidential candidate is the “right-wing controlled Supreme Court,” which she argued could before 2024 give more power to state legislatures to “overturn presidential elections.” Others have sounded the alarm over state legislatures gaining more control in how to conduct elections in 2024. Clinton herself is no stranger to being openly frustrated at election results themselves, referring to her opponent Trump, who defeated her in 2016, in the past as an “illegitimate president.”

        The “very real threat to democracy” presented by Republicans, Clinton said at one point, is keeping her “up at night.”

        “We’re all focused on winning the midterms and defending our congressional majorities. That’s critical. But we also must take the fight to MAGA Republicans at the state level,” the group claims.

        Some political analysts have predicted Clinton is slowly but surely re-entering the spotlight before ultimately announcing a 2024 presidential run.

        In September, Clinton was asked during a CBS interview if she plans to run for president again which she answered “no” but noted she was committed to helping defeat Trump, who has strongly hinted at a 2024 campaign.

        “No, no, but I’m going to do everything I can to make sure that we have a president who respects our democracy and the rule of law and upholds our institutions,” Clinton said at the time.

        “He should be soundly defeated,” Clinton continued “It should start in the Republican Party. Grow a backbone. Stand up to this guy.”

        Judge Weighs Removing Jack Smith in Trump Classified Documents Case

          1
          Gavel via Wikimedia Commons Image

          Florida Judge Aileen Cannon is currently holding a hearing to consider whether the appointment of U.S. Special Counsel Jack Smith and the funding of his investigations is “unlawful.”

          Upon postponing the classified documents trial, Cannon scheduled deadlines for reports on June 10 and 17 and a hearing on a motion to dismiss on Friday, “based on unlawful appointment and funding of special counsel.” 

          Cannon expanded Friday’s hearing to allow amici to argue before the court, as well as Trump defense attorneys and federal prosecutors according to Fox News.

          Former Attorney General Ed Meese, who served under former President Reagan, filed an amicus brief in the case, in which he argues that Attorney General Merrick Garland’s appointment of Smith as special counsel – a private citizen at the time – violates the appointments clause of the Constitution. 

          Garland appointed Smith as special counsel on Nov. 18, 2022, mere days after Trump announced he would run for president in 2024. 

          Meese argues that the “illegality” of Smith’s appointment is “sufficient to sink Smith’s petition, and the Court should deny review.” 

          Meese and company noted in the brief that Smith was appointed “to conduct the ongoing investigation into whether any person or entity [including former President Trump] violated the law in connection with efforts to interfere with the lawful transfer of power following the 2020 presidential election or the certification of the Electoral College vote held on or about January 6, 2021.”

          Earlier this month, Garland defended his move during a hearing on Capitol Hill, arguing that “there are regulations under which the attorney general appoint special counsel. They have been in effect for 30 years, maybe longer, under both parties.” 

          Meese, however, in his briefs filed in several points in the Trump cases, argued that “none of those statutes, nor any other statutory or constitutional provisions, remotely authorized the appointment by the Attorney General of a private citizen to receive extraordinary criminal law enforcement power under the title of Special Counsel.”

          Meese’s brief was even mentioned in a question by Justice Clarence Thomas in the Supreme Court oral arguments over Trump’s presidential immunity in Smith’s other case regarding 2020 election interference, which the high court is expected to decide this month.

          Presenting arguments on June 21 in Florida on behalf of Meese will be Gene Schaerr; Josh Blackman on behalf of Professor Seth Barrett Tillman; and Matthew Seligman on behalf of constitutional lawyers, former government officials, and “State Democracy Defenders Action.”

          This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.

          Disturbing Threat Against Elon Musk Scrawled On NY Overpass: Photos

            4
            UK Government, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

            Residents in Rochester, New York, noticed an apparent threat against billionaire and Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) Chair Elon Musk.

            The Daily Wire spoke to two residents who saw the graffiti, photos of which have been posted online. The graffiti reads, “Who will kill Elon?” It was plastered on a 490 off-ramp bridge to Howell Street.

            Barbara Pierce, Director of Bureau of Communications & Special Events for the City of Rochester, told The Daily Wire via email on Thursday that the “offensive graffiti” was removed “as soon as the city became aware of it.”

            The Daily Wire also reached out to the Rochester Police Department and New York State police about the incident, but has yet to receive a response.

            In recent weeks, Democrats have picked up their attacks on Musk, whom they suggest is causing a “constitutional crisis” as he finds waste, fraud, and abuse in the federal government.

            This past week, for example, Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA) called Musk a “d***” who is “harming the American public in an enormous way” and called for Americans to bring “actual weapons to this bar fight.”

            “What I think is really important and what the American public want is for us to bring actual weapons to this bar fight,” he said on CNN airwaves. “This is an actual fight for democracy, for the future of this country. And it’s important to push back on the chairperson of this committee.”

            Rubio Cracks Up At Trump’s Reaction To NATO leader Calling President ‘Daddy’

              0

              Secretary of State Marco Rubio couldn’t keep it together when Donald Trump gave his reaction to NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte calling the commander in chief “daddy” earlier Wednesday. 

              During their bilateral meeting in The Hague, Netherlands, Trump discussed the U.S.’ role in brokering a fragile ceasefire between Israel and Iran, saying both countries were like “two kids in a school yard” who “fight like hell” for a short time before “it’s easier to stop them.” 

              Rutte interjected, “Then daddy has to sometimes use strong language.” 

              Trump had used profanity in front of reporters outside the White House before boarding Marine One on Tuesday, saying about Israel and Iran that they “have been fighting so long and so hard that they don’t know what the f— they’re doing. ” 

              At a subsequent press conference Wednesday, Rubio broke into hysterics when a reporter from Sky News asked Trump about the remark. 

              The reporter reminded Trump that Rutte, “who is your friend.… He called you daddy.” 

              “Do you regard your NATO allies as kind of children?” the reporter asked. 

              Trump responded lightheartedly, and Rubio could be seen standing next to him starting to smile and laugh. “No, he likes me. I think he likes me. If he doesn’t, I’ll let you know. I’ll come back, and I’ll hit him hard. Okay?” Trump said jokingly. 

              “He did. He did it. Very affectionate,” Trump added of Rutte. “‘Daddy, You’re my daddy.'” 

              Watch:

              NATO leaders on Wednesday committed that the member states would contribute 5% of GDP annually to defense and security obligations by 2035. 

              “You’re obviously appreciative of that,” the reporter said. “But do you hope that actually they’re going to be able to defend themselves, defend Europe on their own?” 

              “I think they’ll need help a little bit at the beginning, and I think they’ll be able to,” Trump said. “I think they’re going to remember this day and this is a big day for NATO. You know, this was a very big day.” 

              “It’s been sort of an amazing day for a lot of reasons, but also for that,” Trump added, referencing how the greater contributions were decades in the making. Trump claimed it was not possible until he came along. 

              Department of Justice Publishes Affidavit Used for FBI Raid on Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Resort

                3
                Marine One lifts-off after returning President Donald J. Trump to Mar-a-Lago Friday, March 29, 2019, following his visit to the 143-mile Herbert Hoover Dike near Canal Point, Fla., that surrounds Lake Okeechobee. The visit was part of an infrastructure inspection of the dike, which is part of the Kissimmee-Okeechobee Everglades system, and reduces impacts of flooding for areas of south Florida. (Official White House Photo by Joyce N. Boghosian) [Photo Credit: The White House from Washington, DC, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons]

                The Justice Department has officially released the redacted affidavit used to obtain the search warrant used by the FBI in its recent raid of former President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence under the direction of U.S. Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart.

                A website where the federal judge in Florida is unsealing documents relating to the FBI’s raid is repeatedly crashing because of surging demand.

                “The government is conducting a criminal investigation concerning the improper removal and storage of classified information in unauthorized spaces, as well as the unlawful concealment or removal of government records,” the affidavit states. 

                Approximately 20 pages of the 38-page affidavit were either significantly or fully redacted.

                The FBI said it had “probable cause to believe” that records containing classified information, including National Defense Information, would be found within Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in addition to what he had previously turned over to the National Archives and Records Administration according to the document.

                Read the redacted affidavit below:

                Judge Bruce Reinhart gave the Justice Department until noon on Thursday to submit the redacted document after rejecting the Justice Department’s pressure to keep the record under seal.

                Fox News reports:

                Reinhart said that after reviewing the Justice Department’s redaction, the government “has met its burden of showing a compelling reason” and “good cause to seal portions of the Affidavit,” saying the disclosure would reveal “the identities of witnesses, law enforcement agents, and uncharged parties,” the investigation’s “strategy, direction, scope, sources, and methods, and “grand jury information” protected by federal rules. 

                Reinhart said that after reviewing the affidavit with redactions, he has determined that the Justice Department “has met its burden of showing that its proposed redactions are narrowly tailored to serve the Government’s legitimate interest in the integrity of the ongoing investigation and are the least onerous alternative to sealing the entire Affidavit.” 

                On Monday, Judge Reinhart wrote in a memo that he was inclined to make parts of the document public, saying it would “promote public understanding of historically significant events.” The DOJ pressured Reinhart to keep the document under wraps out of concern Trump supporters would retaliate against witnesses.

                Ahead of the affidavit’s release, Trump slammed the Justice Department’s “political hacks and thugs” in a statement shared to Truth Social.

                “The political hacks and thugs had no right under the Presidential Records Act to storm Mar-a-Lago and steal everything in sight including passports and privileged documents. They even broke into my safe with a safecracker – Can you believe?” Trump added. “This Act was created for a very good reason, and it works. We are right now living in a Lawless Country that just so happens to be, also, a Failing Nation!”

                When asked if national security could’ve been compromised by Trump’s handling of classified documents, Biden deferred to the ongoing investigation

                Trump has responded following the affidavit’s release calling for Judge Reinhart’s immediate recusal from the case.

                “Judge Bruce Reinhart should NEVER have allowed the Break-In of my home. He recused himself two months ago from one of my cases based on his animosity and hatred of your favorite President, me,” Trump wrote on his Truth social account. “What changed? Why hasn’t he recused himself on this case? Obama must be very proud of him right now!

                President Joe Biden dismissed claims from Trump that he broadly declassified the boxes of White House documents he took to Florida after leaving office.

                “I’ve declassified everything in the world. I’m president,” Biden said sarcastically, waving his hands in the air to reporters outside of the White House. “Come on.”

                Republican lawmakers have shared harsh reactions to the substantial redactions since the affidavit’s publication.

                Arizona Rep. Andy Biggs shared a screenshot of one of the heavily redacted pages and called for more transparency on this Twitter.

                North Carolina Congressman echoed calls for transparency in his own message.

                Conservative report Elijah Schafer shared a touch-and-cheek message about the redacted document as well.

                READ NEXT: President Biden Labels MAGA Supporters as a ‘Threat to Democracy’ >>

                Report: Democrats Push Tulsi Gabbard Confirmation Hearing

                  5
                  Tulsi Gabbard via Gage Skidmore Flickr

                  President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee to be the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) is facing an uphill battle for confirmation.

                  Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), the vice chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, signaled he plans to meet again with Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii).

                  Fox News’s Chad Pergram summed up the Virginia Democrat’s remarks, quoting, “This is an extraordinarily serious job that requires maintaining the independence of the intelligence community. It also means maintaining the cooperation of our allies. We’ve got a lot of our intelligence from our allies on a sharing basis, and if those that information is not kept secure, it raises huge concern. So..we’ve got a number of questions out for her. This is the beginning of a process.”

                  Axios reported on Tuesday that Warner and other Senate Democrats have moved to delay Gabbard’s hearing.

                  “Warner has pointed out that the committee has not yet received Gabbard’s FBI background check, ethics disclosure or a pre-hearing questionnaire, a source familiar with the matter told us. Committee rules require the background check a week in advance of a hearing,” reported Axios.

                  Intel Committee Chairman Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) told the outlet in a statement he “intends to hold these hearings before Inauguration Day. The Intelligence Committee, the nominees, and the transition are diligently working toward that goal.”

                  “After the terrorist attacks on New Year’s Eve and New Year’s Day, it’s sad to see Sen. Warner and Democrats playing politics with Americans’ safety and our national security,” Trump transition spokesperson Alexa Henning also told Axios.

                  Top Trump Admin Official Shares Big Prediction About Energy Prices

                  1

                  Energy markets could see a sharp reversal if tensions ease in the Middle East, as U.S. officials signal that a diplomatic breakthrough with Iran may be within reach.

                  The outlook comes after President Donald Trump said earlier Monday that negotiations with Iran have been “very good and productive,” announcing a five-day pause on planned U.S. strikes against Iranian energy infrastructure to allow talks to continue.

                  Against that backdrop, U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright said oil prices could fall significantly if a deal leads to the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, a critical global shipping route that has faced disruptions in recent weeks.

                  Wright made the comments during an appearance on FOX Business’ “Varney & Co.” with host Lauren Simonetti, emphasizing how closely energy markets are tied to developments in the region.

                  “They would go down quite a bit. If we see a pathway to have the Strait of Hormuz open soon and energy flowing again, you’d see energy prices drop pretty significantly,” Wright said.

                  Global markets have been reacting to reduced traffic through the strategic waterway, one of the world’s most important energy chokepoints. Even temporary disruptions have driven fuel costs higher for consumers.

                  Wright suggested that the trajectory of energy prices will depend largely on whether Iran chooses to de-escalate and engage in negotiations.

                  “That could happen if a peace agreement is reached… If Iran thinks enough is enough, and they’re willing to make a deal… Then there’ll be a deal,” Wright said.

                  For now, officials caution that short-term volatility is likely to continue as negotiations unfold, though a sustained diplomatic breakthrough could quickly stabilize markets.

                  Outrage as Biden’s Woke Pentagon Funds Travel for Female Troops to Get Out-of-State Abortions

                    6
                    David B. Gleason from Chicago, IL, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

                    OPINION – The insane leftist overreaction to the reversal of Roe v Wade continues with Joe Biden’s woke Pentagon now providing leave and taxpayer funding for female troops wanting to go out of state to murder their unborn children.

                    Despite the ready availability of contraceptives throughout the United States, and the availability of abortions in almost all states up to 10 weeks, and with exceptions for rape, incest, and danger to the life of the mother beyond that, Biden’s DoD thinks it is somehow necessary for the American taxpayer to pay for travel to get abortions.

                    This is outrageous.

                    And far too many Americans, conservative or just plain reasonable, are too cowed by the media and the left to say anything or question the insanity.

                    Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, who has proven to be an absolute embarrassment, announced in a memo how the Pentagon, and taxpayers, will begin paying for female troops and their family members to travel for abortions, under the guise of diabolical leftist doublespeak called ‘access to reproductive healthcare.’

                    The Pentagon memo repeatedly avoids using the term abortion in the memo and replaces it with the innocuous-sounding ‘reproductive healthcare.’

                    “The practical effects of recent changes are that significant numbers of service members and their families may be forced to travel greater distances, take more time off from work, and pay more out-of-pocket expenses to receive reproductive health care,” the secretary wrote.  

                    According to Biden’s Pentagon, post-Roe abortion restrictions are hurting recruiting and retention, which is totally unproven and helps divert for the Pentagon’s wokeness being a primary factor in scaring away potential recruits from traditional upbringings.

                    As the DoD memo notes:

                    Under federal law, DOD funds and facilities may only be used to perform abortions where the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term or in a case in which the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest. The most recent statistics show that between 2016 and 2021, a total of 91 abortions were performed in military medical treatment facilities. 

                    That’s a relatively small number. Still, Austin says that:

                    The department is examining this [Supreme Court] decision closely and evaluating our policies to ensure we continue to provide seamless access to reproductive health care as permitted by federal law.

                    So, despite the fact that DoD already provides abortions in case of danger to the life of the mother, and provides a slew of contraceptives, and guidance, for its male and female troops, Austin believes the Pentagon and taxpayers should pay for these female troops and their families to travel out of state to get abortions beyond those rules.

                    This, even though federal law prohibits abortions outside the above-noted parameters.

                    As National Review writer under the pen name Robert M. Berg notes:

                    To begin with, there is no reason for the DOD to issue any statement regarding Dobbs. The DOD needs to adjust exactly zero policies to comply with this ruling. It does not affect service members. Yet our DOD leadership could not resist weighing in on a political issue, while taking a swipe at one of the three branches of government enshrined in the Constitution that the military is sworn to uphold. 

                    The DOD has no business reviewing and commenting on Supreme Court decisions. So why do it? 

                    The implication is so that it can find ways to provide abortions to American service members, in clear violation of U.S. law and against the intent of the U.S. Congress. If Congress wants to weigh back into this and provide funds for abortion, then that is its job. It most certainly is not the job of the DOD to question one branch of government and look to circumvent another.

                    The writer, an active-duty combat-arms officer with 20-plus years of service, adds:

                    Indeed, following Austin’s comments, the DOD had to issue an official response clarifying its policy. The official memorandum put out by Undersecretary of Defense Gilbert R. Cisneros Jr. softly walked back Austin’s initial statement. The opening paragraph of the memorandum references Secretary Austin’s statement and pretends to echo his message. 

                    However, the first factual statement the memo references is the federal law that restricts DOD funding of abortions. The majority of the memo rehashes that the Dobbs case does not in fact affect military service members. So why even issue a memo at all? That is made clear near the end, when the memo takes veiled political shots at the Supreme Court and issues a statement of intent to try to find ways to circumvent Congress by funding service members’ abortions. 

                    The memo states, “the implications of the Supreme Court’s decision are complicated and must be evaluated against various state laws, together with the views of the Department of Justice.” This statement seems wholly unnecessary, as the entirety of the rest of the memo keeps saying no policies need to be changed. Again, then why do we need a review?

                    The writer concludes:

                    Such actions [only] erode the confidence the American public has in our military and damage our ability to field an effective fighting force. It is no coincidence that, the more political the DOD becomes, the more it must deal with issues such as falling respect for current military service members and difficulty recruiting new ones.

                    Very well said Mr. Berg. 

                    I can only pray Congress will investigate and reverse this new policy once the GOP takes control of the House, and possibly Senate, in a mon

                    Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.