Featured

Home Featured
Featured posts

Asa Hutchinson Announces New Career Move

    0

    Former 2024 GOP presidential candidate Asa Hutchinson is joining Scripps News as a political analyst, the news organization announced on Monday

    The former Arkansas governor who also launched an unsuccessful bid for the White House is set to appear regularly on Mondays on the news outlet’s politics and campaign-oriented evening show, “The Race.”  

    He joined the news outlet as a political analyst for the first time on Monday.  

    “I am excited to be part of the Scripps News team as we head into one of the most consequential elections in history,” Hutchinson said in a press release. “Scripps News is committed to balance in its coverage of politics, and that is what America needs at this critical moment.”  

    According to The Hill, the former Arkansas governor performed poorly in the primary as the Republican contest underscored former President Trump’s enduring dominance within the party. He ultimately dropped out in January after the Iowa caucuses.  

    ‘Squad’ Member Spent Nearly $500k on Security Despite Advocating to Defund the Police

      9
      Cori Bush via Wikimedia Commons

      Radical House Democrat Cori Bush has reportedly spent $490 thousand on private security over the past two years despite her repeated push to defund the police.

      Bush’s campaign paid out over $100,000 for security services during the third quarter of 2022 alone, according to Federal Election Commission records. Just over $71,000 went to private security, while the other $30,000 was categorized for other security services. She has spent $490,000 overall, according to The Washington Examiner.

      “The thing about ‘defund the police’ is we have to tell the entire narrative,” Bush said in an interview on Good Morning America. “People hear ‘defund the police.’ But you know what they’ll say? Say ‘reallocate,’ say ‘divest,’ say ‘move.’ But it’s still the same thing. We can’t get caught up on the word. People spend more time focusing on the word ‘defund’ than they spend on caring and addressing the problem of police in this country.”

      Bush previously pushed back on comments against her high expenditure on security last year after Fox News noted that the congresswoman was paying for private security. The security was because people had made death threats against her in the past, Bush said.

      “They would rather I die?” Bush asked CBS News in 2021. “You would rather me die? Is that what you want to see? You want to see me die? You know, because that could be the alternative.”

      Bush, along with other progressive “Squad” members, have doled out some serious cash for private security services despite publicly crying out against the funding of police.

      Other Squad members have also paid thousands of dollars for private security despite pushes to defund the police. Rep. Ilhan Omar’s (D-MN) campaign paid $27,081.14 to Relative Intel LLC, a Minnesota-based personal-protection firm. Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-MA) spent $4,676 on private security, and Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) spent $2,230, according to Fox News.

      MAHA Year One: How Trump & RFK Jr. Are Rebuilding American Health

      1
      By Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America - Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., CC BY-SA 2.0,

      For decades, Americans were told a story about their health that no longer matched reality. We were assured that food was safe, that regulators were vigilant, that medical advice was insulated from politics and profit, and that rising chronic disease was an unfortunate but unavoidable byproduct of modern life. Meanwhile, the health of the nation deteriorated in plain sight. Obesity climbed year after year. Childhood chronic disease became common rather than exceptional. Autism rates surged. Cancer diagnoses among children rose. By the time President Trump returned to office, 76.4% of Americans were living with at least one chronic disease. Eight out of 10 children could not qualify for military service. What should have been treated as a civilizational emergency was instead normalized, until that long-running failure of honesty and accountability culminated during the COVID-19 pandemic, when public health leaders abandoned transparency, misled the public, and, under Dr. Fauci’s direction, shattered trust in medical professionals and the institutions meant to serve them.

      The collapse of trust that followed COVID did not occur in a vacuum. It was the culmination of years of regulatory capture, scientific arrogance, and a public health establishment that confused authority with truth. Americans were ordered, not persuaded. Dissent was pathologized. Data was selectively presented. Vaccine policy was enforced through mandate rather than transparency. Dr. Fauci became the symbol of an anti-science regime that claimed infallibility while revising its claims in real time. When institutions insist on obedience while refusing accountability, trust does not merely erode; it implodes.

      It is against this backdrop that the Make America Healthy Again initiative must be understood. MAHA is not a branding exercise or a partisan slogan. It is a course correction. President Trump’s decision to place Robert F. Kennedy Jr. at the helm of HHS was not an appeal to nostalgia or name recognition. It was an explicit rejection of the managerial consensus that presided over the chronic disease explosion. The mandate was simple and radical: identify root causes, dismantle regulatory capture, and tell the truth even when it disrupts powerful interests.

      Skeptics ask whether one year can matter. The answer depends on what one expects a first year to do. MAHA was never going to reverse decades of metabolic, environmental, and institutional decay overnight. Its purpose was to reorient the system, establish credibility, and force long-delayed questions back into the open. By that standard, the first year has been historic.

      Start with the scope of institutional change. President Trump signed an executive order establishing the MAHA Commission, chaired by Secretary Kennedy, with a singular focus on chronic disease. For the first time in generations, chronic illness was treated not as an actuarial inevitability but as a policy failure demanding investigation. This alone marked a break with orthodoxy. Under previous administrations, chronic disease spending rose to $1.3T annually while prevention remained an afterthought. When Kennedy notes that the federal government once spent essentially nothing on chronic disease, he is not making a rhetorical point. He is diagnosing a structural blind spot.

      The results are already visible. Thirty-seven states have enacted legislation advancing MAHA-aligned reforms. Nearly 100 MAHA-related bills have passed nationwide. Eighteen states secured SNAP waivers to restrict taxpayer-funded junk food purchases that directly fuel obesity and diabetes. These are not symbolic victories. They are structural incentives aligned with public health rather than industry convenience.

      Food policy has been the most visible arena of reform, and for good reason. The American diet did not become toxic by accident. It was engineered through regulatory loopholes that allowed synthetic additives to enter the food supply under the GRAS standard with minimal oversight. MAHA moved quickly to overhaul this system. Agreements now cover roughly 40% of the food industry, committing to remove petroleum-based synthetic dyes. The dairy industry has pledged to eliminate artificial dyes from ice cream by 2028. These changes matter because they reset norms. Once voluntary reform becomes expected, resistance collapses.

      The same logic applies to infant health. Operation Stork Speed was launched to expand access to safe and nutritious infant formula while removing heavy metals that had no business entering baby food in the first place. For parents who watched institutions minimize legitimate safety concerns during COVID, this shift toward precaution and transparency has been decisive in rebuilding trust.

      Critics often ask whether MAHA is anti-science. The premise is backward. MAHA is anti-dogma. It insists that science earns authority through openness, replication, and humility. This is why vaccine policy has been reframed around informed consent and gold standard trials rather than mandates. Honesty about uncertainty is not weakness. It is the precondition of credibility. Public trust returns when institutions stop pretending to be omniscient.

      This emphasis on trust extends beyond food and vaccines. HHS issued guidance restoring biological truth, recognizing that there are two sexes, male and female. This was not culture war theater. Medicine depends on biological reality. When institutions deny observable facts for ideological reasons, patients notice. Restoring clarity restores confidence.

      MAHA’s critics also underestimate the importance of state-level experimentation. Utah’s decision to ban added fluoride in public drinking water did not impose a national mandate. It reopened a conversation that had been closed by bureaucratic inertia. Communities are once again allowed to weigh risks and benefits rather than defer to outdated consensus.

      Health care delivery itself has not been ignored. Prior authorization has long functioned as a hidden tax on patients and physicians, delaying care while enriching intermediaries. Secretary Kennedy and CMS Administrator Oz secured industry commitments to streamline this process across health plans. Less paperwork means faster treatment and lower burnout. These are the reforms patients feel immediately.

      Drug pricing has followed the same philosophy. President Trump’s most favored nation order is being rapidly implemented to align U.S. prescription drug prices with those paid abroad. This is not price control masquerading as populism. It is a refusal to subsidize global markets at the expense of American patients. Lower prices are a public health intervention.

      Physical health has returned to the cultural mainstream as well. The Pete and Bobby Challenge, launched by Secretary Kennedy alongside Defense Secretary Hegseth, did something that countless white papers failed to do. It made fitness visible again. A nation where most children cannot meet basic physical standards is not merely unhealthy. It is vulnerable.

      The MAHA Commission’s release of the Make Our Children Healthy Again strategy, outlining more than 120 initiatives, signaled that childhood chronic disease is no longer being treated as a mystery or a taboo. New data linking rising thyroid and kidney cancers among children demands answers. Autism rates demand answers. MAHA has made clear that asking these questions is not forbidden. It is required.

      Perhaps the most underestimated achievement of the first year is cultural rather than regulatory. Trust is returning because institutions are speaking plainly. The public understands that special interests once thrived behind closed doors. They know they were sold better cigarettes and sugar smacks with a health halo. What they demanded in 2024 was not perfection. It was honesty.

      President Trump and Secretary Kennedy have delivered the first credible attempt in decades to dismantle the alliance between bureaucratic power and corporate profit that hollowed out public health. The appointments at NIH, FDA, and CMS reflect this shift. These are not partisan enforcers. They are reformers tasked with ending capture and restoring the mission.

      No serious observer should claim that the work is finished. Chronic disease did not emerge in one year, and it will not be eliminated in one term. But trajectories matter. Incentives matter. Trust matters most of all. After years in which Americans were told to comply and not question, MAHA has reopened the social contract between the public and medicine.

      Public health cannot function without consent. Consent requires trust. Trust requires truth. That is the chain MAHA is rebuilding. It is why the first year matters. Not because every problem has been solved, but because the system has finally been pointed in the right direction.

      If you enjoy my work, please subscribe: https://x.com/amuse.

      Sponsored by the John Milton Freedom Foundation, a nonprofit dedicated to helping independent journalists overcome formidable challenges in today’s media landscape and bring crucial stories to you.

      Haley Says She Would Pardon Trump As President

        3
        The White House from Washington, DC, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

        Presidential candidate Nikki Haley said on Thursday that, if elected president, she would pardon former President Trump, arguing it would be “in the best interest of the country.”

        “I would pardon Trump,” Haley said at a campaign event, according to a video captured by NBC News.

        “If he is found guilty, a leader needs to think about what’s in the best interest of the country,” Haley said. “What’s in the best interest of the country is not to have an 80-year-old man sitting in jail, that continues to divide our country.”

        “What’s in the best interest of the country would be to pardon him, so that we can move on as a country and no longer talk about him,” she added.

        Haley has recently enjoyed a bump in her polling numbers, but still, former President Trump leads the pack of GOP candidates by more than 50 points.

        Trump faces four criminal cases, for a total of 91 criminal counts for his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

        Amanda Head: Did Lizzo Desecrate American History? My Answer Will Shock You

          0

          Popular pop singer, performer, and accomplished flutist Lizzo was recently given the opportunity to play former President James Madison’s one-of-a-kind crystal flute while in Washington, D.C. Some critics have taken issues with the Library of Congress’s decision to let the 34-year-old handle such a delicate piece of American history but Amanda has another take…

          Watch what Amanda has to say about Lizzo below.

          Report: GOP Insiders Are Betting Against Trump

            7

            According to a new report from Politico Playbook, several long-standing Republican politicians are secretly rooting for Donald Trump to lose to Kamala Harris this November.

            These officials believe that for the GOP to stand a chance of consistently winning future elections, it needs to move past the controversies and divisions of the Trump era.

            Politico reportedly spoke to a variety of conservative voices who are disenchanted with Trump for different reasons, though they’re hesitant to admit it publicly. The sources are not the typical Never Trump crowd, according to the report.

            Mediaite’s David Gilmour provides further details on the situation:

            Key individuals that have relayed their concerns in confidence include free-marketeers concerned about Trump’s tariff idea, pro-life lawmakers disconcerted by the former president’s pro-choice remarks and defense hawks worried about his stance on NATO.

            One conservative leader told Playbook: “There’s a lot of anxiety about what Trump does to Republican ability to win in 2028 — and what he also may do to the party in terms of policy long-term. There is just this concern that like, ‘OK, if the party just goes in that direction, then what kind of party is it going forward? And can conservatives, then, have a home going forward?’”

            new column by Politico reporter Jonathan Martin wrote: “the best possible outcome in November for the future of the Republican Party is for Donald Trump to lose and lose soundly.”

            He added: “GOP leaders won’t tell you that on the record. I just did.”

            While losing the White House would give Democrats more control in the short term, some of the sources Politico spoke to argue that a Trump defeat could make the GOP a more viable force in future elections.

            What do you think? Tell us in the comments below!

            Notorious Criminal Speaks Out Ahead Of Trump Hush Money Trial

              1

              On Tuesday, MSNBC’s Ari Melber interviewed incarcerated convicted felon Michael Avenatti to get his thoughts on former President Donald Trump’s fast-approaching New York criminal hush money trial.

              Avenatti, a disbarred attorney, is currently serving 19 years for extortion, fraud, obstruction, and identity theft. Some of those charges stem from his theft of proceeds from a book by his former client, Stormy Daniels. 

              The former president faces 34 charges linked to hush money payments made by his ex-fixer to porn actress Stormy Daniels to cover up an alleged affair ahead of the 2016 election. He has pleaded not guilty.

              Trump is scheduled to head to trial in his New York criminal case on April 15.

              Mediaite has more:

              “Michael, have you been in touch with D.A. Bragg’s office?” Melber asked. “And what specifically in evidence or logic do you think is wrong with this case?”

              “I’m going to decline to answer as to whether I’ve been in touch with either the defense or the D.A.s office,” Avenatti replied. “But let me say this in response to the second part of your question. You know, I think the case has a lot of problems. Now that– I don’t mean to suggest that means that Trump will not be convicted because I think he will be convicted because number one, he’s a criminal defendant in our society. I don’t believe criminal defendants generally get a fair shake.”

              Avenatti then echoed attorneys for Trump, who have unsuccessfully attempted to secure a change of venue. He said:

              I don’t think that he can get a fair trial in New York. And to the people who claim that in fact, he can get a fair trial in New York with a New York jury, I would ask them, if they were to go to sleep tonight and wake up tomorrow and find out that the case had been moved to Mississippi or Alabama, would they still think the trial was going to be fair?

              And I think if they were being honest, they would answer no. So, I don’t think he can get a fair trial in New York.

              On Monday, a judge in New York denied a request for a delay in his hush money trial. Trump’s attorneys argued for the trial to be relocated from Manhattan and postponed as they pursue the matter. 

              Trump’s attorneys argued for the trial to be relocated from Manhattan and postponed as they pursue the matter. His attorneys argued that Manhattan, a well-known liberal bastion, was not an appropriate location for the Republican president’s case. They requested a change of venue to Staten Island, the only borough in New York City that Trump won in both 2016 and 2020.

              Hannity Backs Biden’s Plan To Cut Mics At Debates To Curtail Trump’s Aggression

                5
                The White House from Washington, DC, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

                Shortly before Joe Biden and Donald Trump agreed to presidential debates in June and September on Wednesday morning, Sean Hannity appeared on “Fox & Friends” to hail the incumbent president’s unexpected proposal for a debate as “excellent news.”

                Hannity even backed Biden’s suggestion to mute a candidate’s microphone if they aren’t answering a question. The Fox News host argued that this would reduce Trump’s “aggressiveness.” Hannity maintained that Trump’s combative behavior and taunting during the first 2020 debate with Biden likely hurt him.

                He expects that this time will be different. Addressing the new format, Hannity said, “This will put rails in place so that one person talks at a time, and the more Joe talks, I think the worse he does.”

                “I think Donald Trump will wipe the floor with him, and I don’t care if we get the State of the Union jacked up Joe with caffeine, Red Bull, or whatever, or we get regular Joe that could barely walk off the stage last night.”

                As Mediaite reports:

                In a video posted to social media on Wednesday, Biden needled Trump over his ongoing criminal trial in Manhattan and said he beat him in two debates in 2020.

                “Make my day, pal,” the president said.

                Trump responded to Biden’s proposal by accepting on Truth Social and calling Biden the “worst debater I have ever faced.”

                Article Published With The Permission of American Liberty News

                Judge Orders Trump White House To Restore AP Access

                  2

                  On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden, an appointee of President Trump, directed the White House to resume allowing the AP into the Oval Office, Air Force One and other limited spaces when they’re made available to other press pool members.

                  He also granted the AP’s request for access to events open to all credentialed White House reporters, though he listed several caveats.

                  “This injunction does not limit the various permissible reasons the Government may have for excluding journalists from limited-access events. It does not mandate that all eligible journalists, or indeed any journalists at all, be given access to the President or nonpublic government spaces. It does not prohibit government officials from freely choosing which journalists to sit down with for interviews or which ones’ questions they answer. And it certainly does not prevent senior officials from publicly expressing their own views,” McFadden wrote.

                  “No, the Court simply holds that under the First Amendment, if the Government opens its doors to some journalists—be it to the Oval Office, the East Room, or elsewhere—it cannot then shut those doors to other journalists because of their viewpoints,” he wrote. “The Constitution requires no less.”

                  After his initial ruling, the judge paused the order from going into effect until April 13, to give the Trump administration time to appeal.

                  Scores of news organizations use the AP Stylebook for guidance on spelling, grammar and how to refer to certain people and places, to help ensure such references are widely understood in the U.S. and globally.

                  Charles Tobin, a lawyer for the AP, said during a hearing last month that the news organization was in the “penalty box” for crossing Trump, which he called “abject retaliation.”

                  “The White House hasn’t hidden that,” Tobin said. “They’ve doubled down.”

                  Scores of news organizations use the AP Stylebook for guidance on spelling, grammar and how to refer to certain people and places, to help ensure such references are widely understood in the U.S. and globally.

                  Charles Tobin, a lawyer for the AP, said during a hearing last month that the news organization was in the “penalty box” for crossing Trump, which he called “abject retaliation.”

                  “The White House hasn’t hidden that,” Tobin said. “They’ve doubled down.”

                  AP spokesperson Lauren Easton said the decision affirms the fundamental right to “speak freely without government retaliation.”

                  “This is a freedom guaranteed for all Americans in the U.S. Constitution,” she said. “We look forward to continuing to provide factual, nonpartisan and independent coverage of the White House for billions of people around the world.”

                  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.