Latest

    Featured

    Home Featured Page 42
    Featured posts

    CIA Sued Over Role In Hunter Biden Laptop Election Cover-Up

    By
    Donny Ferguson
    -
    3
    The New Headquarters Building (NHB) of the CIA. The Central Intelligence Agency, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

    A nonprofit legal watchdog has filed a federal lawsuit against the Central Intelligence Agency, seeking documents and records over an election-year government effort to cover up reporting seen as damaging to Joe Biden’s presidential campaign.

    In particular, the group seeks information on the agency’s role in a letter signed by 51 intelligence officials that falsely claimed the Russian government “planted” evidence of criminal activity on a laptop owned by Biden’s middle-aged son Hunter.

    Judicial Watch filed the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the CIA for all “communications of the spy agency’s Prepublication Classification Review Board (PCRB) regarding an October 19, 2020, email request to review and ‘clear’ a letter signed by 51 former intelligence community officials characterizing the Hunter Biden laptop story as having ‘all the earmarks of a Russian disinformation campaign,’” the group announced.

    “The Deep State CIA, it seems, engaged in election interference and a political operation against the American people to help Joe Biden and hurt Trump,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “And now the CIA is ignoring FOIA law to cover up its role in the scandal, censoring and suppressing the Hunter Biden/Joe Biden laptop story just before the presidential election.”

    In October 2020, the New York Post broke a bombshell story revealing that Hunter Biden’s laptop, which he abandoned at a Delaware computer shop, contained photographs of Hunter Biden engaged in drug use and using prostitutes, as well as emails describing what appear to be shady foreign business deals.

    Fearing the story could damage Biden’s presidential campaign, social media companies attempted to suppress the sharing of the Post’s reporting.

    The Biden campaign also reached out to intelligence officials, including the CIA and FBI, seeking their help in falsely discrediting the story.

    “In a May 10, 2023, report the House Judiciary Committee revealed that on October 19, 2020, three days before the second presidential debate between President Donald Trump and Democrat candidate Joe Biden, then-Acting CIA Director Michael Morell sent the PCRB the finalized letter for review, calling it a ‘rush job,’ and quickly secured its approval,” Judicial Watch reports.

    Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit after the CIA failed to respond to a May 11, 2023, FOIA request for:

    Records and communications of the Prepublication Classification Review Board, Central Intelligence Agency, including emails, email chains, email attachments, text messages, cables, voice recordings, correspondence, statements, letters, memoranda, reports, presentations, notes, or other form of record, regarding an October 19, 2020, email request to review and “clear” a letter involving the Hunter Biden laptop story potentially having Russian involvement or being a Russian disinformation plot.

    An investigation by the House Judiciary Committee and House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence found that the CIA, or a CIA employee, may have helped the Biden campaign find signers for the false letter.

    One former CIA employee, David Cariens, reveals that while speaking with the PCRB in October 2020 to review materials for his memoir, a CIA employee “asked” him to sign the false letter.

    “When the person in charge of reviewing the book called to say it was approved with no changes, I was told about the draft letter,” said Cariens.

    “The person asked me if I would be willing to sign. . . . After hearing the letter’s contents, and the qualifiers in it such as, “We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails provided to the New York Post by President Trump’s personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement . . .’ I agreed to sign,” Cariens said.

    “If accurate, this information raises fundamental concerns about the role of the CIA in helping to falsely discredit allegations about the Biden family in the weeks before the 2020 presidential election,” Judicial Watch notes.

    Another former CIA officer, Marc Polymeropoulos, criticized the CIA’s involvement in his testimony to the House Judiciary Committee in the following exchange:

    Q. Does what [Former CIA official David Cariens] described there, that interaction with the [Prepublication Classification Review Board], sound like a quid pro quo to you?

    A. I can’t comment on this. This is—to me, this is something that the [Prepublication Classification Review Board] in my experience would never engage in something like that. They are just straightforward back and forth in terms of approval. The idea they would have a comment on any other thing that they were working on, that to me is not even close to what I’ve experienced with them.

    Q. Does that concern you?

    A. If it’s true, it would concern me, for sure. But I just—I have a hard time believing that occurred. If it did, that’s incredibly unprofessional.

    The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk. It first appeared in American Liberty News.

    READ NEXT: Longtime ACU/CPAC Leader David Keene Speaks Out After Vice Chair’s Resignation

    Bolton Reacts To Trump Mugshot: ‘He Looks Like A Thug’

    By
    admin
    -
    6
    The White House from Washington, DC, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

    Former Trump administration national security advisor John Bolton called his old boss a “thug” after seeing his booking photo.

    During an interview with CNN’s Kaitlan Collins, Bolton suggested that the mugshot may have been deliberately staged to portray the former president as tough.

    Collins began the interview by asking, “I just wonder, as someone who worked inside the West Wing when Donald Trump was president, what is it like for you to see his mug shot tonight?”

    Bolton responded, “I thought it was carefully staged. They must have thought about what look they wanted. He could have smiled. He could have looked benign. Instead, he looks like a thug. I think it’s intended to be a sign of intimidation against the prosecutors and judges. That’s what they picked, and we’ll see that picture everywhere.”

    Breitbart has the transcript:

    Collins said, “So, you think they actually spent time deciding, you know, should he smile in this? Should he have this scowl that he appears to have gone with?”

    Bolton said, “Almost as much time as they spent combing his hair.”

    Collins said, “He posted the mug shot, you know, shortly after on his own social media account, along with the phrase, never surrender. I mean, a bit ironic, given he had just surrendered at the Fulton County Jail behind me. But how do you expect him to try to use this to his political advantage, as he’s running for president?”

    Bolton said that Trump would use the latest development in Georgia to his political advantage in the Republican primary as he has thus far: “Well, I think in the same way he’s used the other three indictments. I think the evidence is that the indictments have proven the law of diminishing margin of utility. If anything, they’re not undercutting his support. They’re building it up.”

    Trump Is Right To Reject RNC’s Unpatriotic Demand – But He Needs To Go Further

    By
    Norman Leahy
    -
    3
    Gage Skidmore Flickr

    Former President Donald Trump is right: There’s no reason he should sign a GOP loyalty oath in order to participate in the candidates’ debates.

    Such oaths, which the Republican National Committee employed in the 2016 presidential primary – only to see the last remaining candidates, including Trump, abandon it – aren’t just signs of a party’s weakness; they are also profoundly silly and even un-American.

    Yes, we swear plenty of legally enforceable oaths – in court cases, for example, or declarations on tax forms and other legal documents. But oaths binding candidates to support someone who they’ve campaigned against, throwing elbows, mud and other rhetorical barbs at them for months to convince voters the guy was a bum?

    I’ll defer to what Sen. Ted Cruz said of such an oath back in the 2016 presidential primary:

    Cruz has dodged the question of whether the pledge still holds by insisting he will be the nominee. Though on Friday, in an apparent reference to Trump, Cruz said, “I don’t make a habit out of supporting people who attack my wife and attack my family.”

    We all know that Cruz eventually did support Trump’s candidacy and became one of his biggest defenders in the Senate (which was amusing).

    But the oath? Nah. The 2016 primary should have been instructive to party leaders that such commitments are transactional at best and unenforceable in fact. Which brings us to the state parties.

    They have been long-time players in loyalty oaths, often attempting to bind voters to the party’s eventual nominees. While such pledges are even sillier and utterly unenforceable, that hasn’t stopped new ones from cropping up this year. Consider the case of Florida‘s pledge:

    Christian Ziegler, the chairman of the Florida GOP, said in an email that the loyalty pledge is an effort to “ensure maximum unity” headed into the 2024 general election.

    “The days of outlier party grifters – such as Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger – using Republican Party resources to secure a title and then weaponize that title against our own team must end,” Ziegler said, referring to two former House members, who are among Trump’s most vocal GOP critics.

    “Contested primaries are part of the process,” he said, “but we must always remember that the Democrats are the true threat to the America we love and we must be unified to defeat every single one of them.”

    The true threat to America is noxious oaths that bind us to men rather than pledges or oaths that bind individuals to uphold the law or tell the truth.

    You know, like the only oath that should ever matter for a presidential candidate: the one the Constitution requires:

    I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

    Every other partisan oath is legally dubious, intellectually suspect and, in the end, not worth the paper it’s printed on.

    The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of  Great America News Desk. It first appeared in American Liberty News.

    Longtime ACU/CPAC Leader David Keene Speaks Out After Vice-Chair’s Resignation

    By
    Victoria Churchill
    -
    2
    Charlie Gerow speaking at the 2018 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in National Harbor, Maryland. [Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore from Peoria, AZ, United States of America, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons]

    Longtime Conservative leader Charlie Gerow has resigned as Vice Chairman of the American Conservative Union (ACU/CPAC) and as a Board Member of the ACU Foundation (ACUF).

    His resignation follows several recent resignations of other officers and directors of ACU/CPAC/ACUF.

    Like other former directors and officers, Gerow cited growing concerns with the sexual battery charges against ACU/CPAC Chairman Matt Schlapp, financial questions, and internal management problems.

    Gerow’s resignation comes on the heels of the organization’s Treasurer, former Congressman Bob Beauprez’s resignation 3 months ago who brought up questions of financial and office mismanagement in his letter to the Board of Directors. POLITICO.com also reported earlier today that attorney Tim Ryan also resigned earlier this week.

    In resigning, Gerow issued the following statement:

    “It is with deep sadness and true regret that I have joined several of my colleagues in resigning from the Board of ACU/CPAC. I have consistently exercised my fiduciary duties to the organization and have always done my very best to fulfill all of my responsibilities to this very vital organization. I know I have done the right things.
    It was a great honor to serve the conservative movement in my leadership roles at CPAC/ACU/ACUF and I will continue to pray that the difficulties they are encountering will be dealt with openly and honestly.
    Although I will not now be able to participate in the August Board meeting, I am calling on my former colleagues to authorize an independent investigation into the charges against Matt Schlapp, to conduct an independent forensic audit of the organization’s finances, to obtain a written opinion of counsel that the organization is in full compliance with its own by-laws and all applicable law and to thoroughly review all the exit interviews of the large number of staff who have recently left CPAC/ACU/ACUF.”

    Gerow also cited his long record of service to the conservative cause.

    The loss of Gerow is a great one for the ACU and the conservative movement as a whole.

    Former ACU Chairman David A. Keene spoke exclusively to American Liberty News this evening about Gerow’s decision to depart his role on the CPAC board.

    “Charlie has always spoken the truth as he sees it, and is a valuable part of both the ACU and the conservative movement as a whole. It is a shame that he feels that he can not be a part of it any longer.”

    Keene served as Chairman of the ACU Board from 1984 to 2011 and his term overlapped with both Schalpp and Gerow’s respective tenure on the board. Keene was succeeded in his role as board Chairman by Al Cardenas, who served in the role until 2014. Schlapp has been Chairman for nearly a decade since then, when he was unanimously elected to the position.

    Keene also noted that CPAC has changed in the era of Schlapp’s chairmanship and that the loss of Gerow is the severing of a link to the original Reagan era of the organization. Once, the annual CPAC conference was a gathering place for conservatives of all stripes. Keene observed that in the past dozen years, the event evolved into “more of a show than a conference” drawing many more corporate sponsors than traditionally conservative grassroots organizations and think tanks. In the past several years, it has been an event showcasing the likes of 45th President Donald Trump and Schlapp himself.

    When asked if those golden days of CPAC can be returned to, Keene stated that the possibility exists, but that it would take “new leadership” to go back to a time when a more diverse group of conservatives could call CPAC home. Still, Keene believes that the gathering is a “vital part of the conservative experience” and those in charge have an obligation to make sure it stays that way.

    The Editor-in-Chief of The National Pulse, Raheem Kassam noted on X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter that “Matt Schlapp has single-handedly made CPAC an irrelevant and corrupt sideshow.  He HAS TO GO.”

    CPAC responded tweeting: “CPAC remains committed to compliance. Having a board that is unified toward the goal of defeating the left and winning on important issues and the next election is critical to saving America.”

    In February of this year, the Washington Post reported that “Schlapp received a $150,000 payment in 2021 for ‘business services’ and he started receiving annual compensation of $600,000 in mid-2022 according to tax documents.” Those records also show that his wife Mercedes received $175,000 for “strategic communications”, per the Post.

    It remains unclear if the remaining board members will support an investigation into Schlapp’s alleged misconduct in the wake of the recent resignations.

    This article originally appeared in American Liberty News. Republished with permission. Continue to check back with American Liberty News for updates as this story develops.

    Is Vivek Ramaswamy The GOP’s New Trump ‘Lite’?

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    13
    Vivek Ramaswamy speaking with attendees at the 2022 AmericaFest at the Phoenix Convention Center in Phoenix, Arizona.

    ANALYSIS- Who is this skinny guy with the funny-sounding name? (That was his opening line at the debate). Vivek Ramaswamy wasn’t supposed to be at the center of the first Republican presidential candidate debate in Milwaukee.

    Ron DeSantis was supposed to be the viable GOP alternative to Donald Trump. A two-term governor of the third most populous state in the union, DeSantis, a Navy veteran who served in Iraq, is as conservative as they come.

    And he has a proven track record of fighting the left in Florida – and winning.

    But despite his solid bona fides and resume, DeSantis has a personality problem. He just doesn’t exude charm or confidence, and that’s hurting him – a lot.

    Meanwhile, Ramaswamy the 38-year-old Trump-defending, Cincinnati-born, biotech billionaire (worth at least $950 million), son of Pakistani immigrants, kind of stole the show at the debate.

    According to former FBI agent and body language expert, Joe Navarro: “[Ramaswamy] consistently looked the most comfortable on stage.”

    He was also the most openly and unabashedly pro-Trump. He was the first candidate to raise their hand when asked who would support the former President as the party nominee even if he is convicted on felony charges that he’s facing.

    He has also promised to pardon Trump if elected. But he went even farther than that.

    “President Trump, I believe, was the best president of the 21st century,” Ramaswamy said in a clip from the debate Trump posted on Truth Social.

    And Trump loved it.

    “This answer gave Vivek Ramaswamy a big WIN in the debate because of a thing called TRUTH. Thank you, Vivek!”

    The ever-smiling political newbie Ramaswamy, who seemed to be having a blast on stage, was also the target of many of his GOP rivals.

    As TIME reported:

    Maybe it was Ramaswamy’s consistent and confounding defense of All Things Trump. Maybe it was his smooth talk and culture-war acumen. Maybe it was just the fact that Ramaswamy frankly does not care how things were done before and might just have enough self-made money to go the distance.

    Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie snarled that he had “had enough already tonight of a guy who sounds like ChatGPT,” an A.I. battery. He then dismissed Ramaswamy as someone on the same level as a political figure universally loathed in the GOP. “The last person in one of these debates… who stood in the middle of the stage and said, ‘What is a skinny guy with an odd last name doing up here?’ was Barack Obama. And I am afraid we are dealing with the same type of amateur standing on the stage tonight,” Christie said.

    But the quick witted Ramaswamy’s riposte to Christie was a zinger: “Give me a hug like you did to Obama, and you’ll help elect me just like you did to Obama. Give me the damn hug, brother.”

    Ramaswamy was referring to the 2012 incident when Christie was accused of “hugging” Obama during his visit in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy which hit days before the 2012 presidential election.

    It’s a claim that Christie has been denying since then, saying: “I didn’t hug him.”

    Photos at the time seem to back up Christie, but the zinger still worked.

    Former U.S. Ambassador to the UN under Trump, and ex-South Carolina governor, Nikki Haley, who is of Indian descent, hit Ramaswamy too: “You have no foreign policy experience, and it shows.”

    I would agree with that assessment and believe he has made a few deeply flawed important national security statements – including on Ukraine and Israel.

    But he is super smart and can learn quickly.

    Then Vice President Mike Pence took a Christie-like jab at Ramaswamy, attacking the very same quality that originally helped raise Trump in the GOP base – that he is not a politician.

    “Now it’s not the time for on-the-job training,” retorted Pence. “We don’t need to bring in a rookie. We don’t need to bring in people with no experience.”

    AS TIME noted: “Attacks during debates are the norm but this was different. Ramaswamy’s competitors really don’t like him. Not even a little.”

    However, there is one important GOP rival who seems to like Ramaswamy – Donald Trump. And that could be all that matters.

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

    Tucker, Elon Real Winners Of First GOP Debate Night

    By
    Victoria Churchill
    -
    2
    Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr
    The true winners of last night’s debate are former prime-time Fox News host Tucker Carlson and Elon Musk, owner of X – formerly Twitter. If you’ve spent the last 24-48 hours under a rock – here’s what transpired last night. Eight Republican candidates running to be the next President of the United States took the stage in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, to talk about their visions for the future of America – and how they are the proper alternatives not only to the babbling buffoon currently in the White House Joe Biden, but also to America’s 45th President Donald Trump – now running for the office for a third time. The Wisconsin event was moderated, albeit poorly, by Fox News anchors Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum. Of course, the debate in itself was probably somewhat staged. According to multiple reports, the candidates and their prep camps were given the questions in advance. While the debate was going on in Milwaukee, Tucker Carlson aired an opposing pre-recorded interview with America’s 45th President Donald Trump, who himself is set to be arraigned in a Fulton County, Georgia court on Thursday where he is expected to front up a bail payment of $200,000. (RELATED: Trump Agrees To Release Conditions, Including $200,000 Bond) Tucker Carlson has enacted fully-fledged revenge on his former employer and put millions of dollars in the pockets of a new corporate overlord, Elon Musk. X, formerly Twitter, has been working to position itself as the preeminent alternative to the mainstream media since the Musk buyout earlier this year. By the view numbers still rolling in on the video posted last night, they seem to have succeeded in doing that to a level even Musk himself may have never imagined. As of the writing of this piece, Tucker’s 46-minute long X video has been viewed over 186.4 million times. Mediaite noted the following in a piece published yesterday:
    “The interview, which was taped this week and is dropping to coincide with the debate, is intended as additional salt in the wound for Fox executives wary that a Trump-less event will not bring in the major ratings typically expected from these kinds of nights.”
    Notably, video-sharing platform Rumble which was the the first place to try and pitch itself as the free speech alternative to YouTube partnered with the RNC and probably boosted their own profits last night as well. The Rumble stream of the debate from the GOP’s channel has amassed 1.54 million views. Definitely a respectable number, but making up less than 1% of the views amassed by Carlson on X. For the record the Rumble stream via Roku is how I personally watched the debate, refusing to give my dollars to the Fox News machine. Fox News has yet to officially release numbers on last night’s debate but here are some viewership numbers reported by Mediaite from past presidential debates:
    “In 2015, Fox’s primary debate – with Trump and nine other candidates – drew 24 million viewers, smashing previous records and earning the distinction of being one of the most-watched cable programs ever. Overall, 2016 was a blockbuster year for debate ratings: the 12 Republican primary events averaged 15 million viewers.”
    Even if Fox’s numbers last night were close to their past viewership – which they are not expected to be without Trump – Carlson’s X video dwarfed those numbers as well. The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk. This piece is republished with permission from American Liberty News.

    Trump Plans to Dramatically Reverse Biden’s Open Border Lunacy

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    0
    Trump at the border wall via Wikimedia Commons

    ANALYSIS – While the left immediately claimed Donald Trump’s immigration plan for his potential second term is ‘draconian,’ and ‘extreme,’ it really isn’t. It’s essentially a needed dramatic reversal to Joe Biden’s extreme open border insanity.

    It’s being referred to as a ‘bolting the hatches’ and ‘bomb the cartels’ strategy. And I’m all for it. 

    Especially since what we have now is total third-world chaos and thoroughly unacceptable for America.

    The New York Post recently reported that Joe Biden has now literally opened the floodgates at the border by welding open 114 gates in Arizona’s border wall near Tucson. 

    The paper noted that in addition to endangered antelope being free to cross:

    …the move is also letting an average of 1,400 migrants from as far away as China casually walk into the country daily — with overwhelmed and outnumbered border agents practically helpless to stop them.

    “We thought the agents were going to tell us something,” one Ecuadorian migrant said. “But we just walked in.”

    The Post added: “Smugglers are capitalizing on the floodgate blunder, driving migrants by the busload to the border and dropping them off as if they were casual tourists.”

    And, unlike the mostly South American migrants who have been stopped crossing illegally into Texas, the immigrants coming to Arizona are from places as far as India, Egypt, and China.

    Rather than the disheveled and exhausted South American migrants at the end of a long and arduous trek across Mexico, the migrants at Tucson now look more like folks on vacation.

    The libertarian-leaning (generally not liberal) Reason outlet was also harshly critical of Trump’s new proposed immigration policies. But when I read their version of what they thought was horrible, I mostly applauded.

    Trump’s plan includes:

    Screening out Marxists as well as Communists – check.

    Screening out potential terrorists from extremist countries – check.

    Ending so-called birthright citizenship so that simply being born here from parents who entered illegally isn’t an option – check.

    Quickly deporting criminal migrants – check.

    Targeting Mexico’s deadly drug cartels as enemy combatants – check.

    Generally making it harder to enter the United States legally (if you are willing to cross Mexico on foot, you can do more paperwork) – check.

    I can easily stand behind every item noted above and below. 

    According to Reason:

    “Trump’s plan would involve waves of harsh new policies — and dust off old ones that rarely have been enforced, if ever,” writes Kight. One policy would “ramp up ideological screening” for would-be legal immigrants. U.S. immigration law already largely bars Communist Party–affiliated people from immigrating, but Trump would reportedly expand that to reject “Marxist” applicants. Another policy would expand the former president’s “Muslim ban” to “block more people from certain countries from entering the U.S.,” notes Axios. Trump’s platform would also include ending birthright citizenship and carrying out quick deportations of criminal migrants under “an obscure section of the 1798 Alien and Sedition Acts.”

    Other aspects of the plan would target drug cartels and smuggling. It would label cartels as “‘unlawful enemy combatants’ to allow the U.S. military to target them in Mexico,” Axios reports, the same designation the government has used “to justify long-term detentions of 9/11 suspects at Guantanamo Bay.” It would also authorize the Coast Guard and Navy to form a blockade in U.S. and Latin American waters to halt boats carrying drugs.

    Certain aspects of the plan, if implemented, would likely run into legal challenges. One such aspect is Trump’s reported intent to use the Alien Enemies Act, signed by President John Adams in 1798, “to quickly remove smugglers and migrant criminals…without having to go through legal steps in [Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s] deportation process.” Other policies would put hopeful migrants—and even travelers—through invasive and costly procedures to enter the U.S., such as social media searches and paying bonds to come here.

    Well, after four years of border violence and chaos, and an unprecedented wave of illegal immigrants being practically invited across an open border before being shuttled throughout the country and fed and housed at taxpayer expense, it is time for some cracking down.

    Bolt the hatches and bomb away.

    Report: Presidential Contender Told Allies He’s Running to Sabotage Ron DeSantis

      By
      Madeleine Jackson
      -
      4
      Vivek Ramaswamy speaking with attendees at the 2022 AmericaFest at the Phoenix Convention Center in Phoenix, Arizona.

      Is this the real reason biotech businessman Vivek Ramaswamy launched a bid for the White House?

      A lengthy report from ABC News casts a look into the decision-making behind Ramaswamy’s surprising presidential campaign with sources noting the Republican businessman is aiming to knock Florida Governor Ron DeSantis’s campaign in an effort to propel Donald Trump forward.

      The report noted that Ramaswamy summoned a small group of conservative operatives to discuss “exciting plans” he had for the coming months in early 2023.

      Ramaswamy pitched himself as a [presidential] candidate who could make serious waves in the Republican primary at the meeting. When met with some skepticism, Ramaswamy argued that his candidacy could also dissuade Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis from entering the race, according to a source who was on the call. In the lead-up to his announcement, Ramaswamy would tell several other conservative activists that he believed that if he ran, it could stop DeSantis from running or impact his viability as a candidate if he did enter the race, sources said.

      The presidential bid reportedly came shortly after a potential podcast partnership with the conservative publication The Daily Wire fell through.

      Another Republican aide who advised Ramaswamy early in his campaign told ABC News that there was frustration among staff early on that the candidate was more concerned about getting his campaign podcast — titled “The Vivek Show” — off the ground, rather than strategizing around how to win the party’s nomination.

      “So why is Vivek running anyway?” Morefield wrote in his column. “It’s hard to imagine it’s not for one or both of the following reasons: 1) To raise his profile and secure some sort of post in the upcoming administration. 2) To pave the way for a Trump defeat of DeSantis.”

      When asked for comment on this story, Ramaswamy’s senior adviser Tricia McLaughlin told ABC News, referring to DeSantis: “Does one of your sources live in a publicly financed mansion in Tallahassee, Florida?”

      GOP Senator Turns on Trump, ‘He Will Lose’

      By
      Madeleine Jackson
      -
      18
      Bill Cassidy via Gage Skidmore Flickr

      Trump didn’t see this one coming…

      Republican Senator Bill Cassidy (La.) predicted former President Donald Trump would lose the 2024 general election against Joe Biden if he’s ultimately the GOP’s presidential nominee.

      Cassidy made the comments during a Sunday appearance on CNN and added that he thinks any other candidate in the Republican primary field is better suited to defeat Biden, a scathing rebuke of the former president he’s often supported.

      “Do you think that Donald Trump should drop out of the race?” host Kasie Hunt asked.

      “I think so. But, obviously, that’s up to him. I mean, you’re just asking me my opinion,” Cassidy responded.

      “But he will lose to Joe Biden, if you look at the current polls. I’m a Republican. I think any Republican on that stage in Milwaukee will do a better job than Joe Biden,” he added. “And so I want one of them to win. If former President Trump ends up getting the nomination, but cannot win a general, that means we will have four more years of policies which have led to very high inflation, to a loss of purchasing power for the average American equivalent to $10,000, and to many other things which I think have been deleterious to our country’s future.”

      However, Sen. Cassidy confirmed that he would vote for Trump if he becomes the Republican nominee.

      Report: Attempted Trump Assassin Gets 22 Years in Prison

        By
        Madeleine Jackson
        -
        2
        Donald Trump via Gage Skidmore Flickr

        The would-be assassin of former President Trump was sentenced to 262 months in prison.

        On Thursday, Pascale Cecile Veronique Ferrier, a 56-year-old dual citizen of Canada and France, was selected to nearly 22 years in prison for mailing a letter containing the poison ricin in 2020 to then-President Trump and others. She pleaded guilty in January to violating biological weapons prohibitions.

        In the letter, Ferrier referred to Trump as “The Ugly Tyrant Clown” and laced it with the potentially deadly ricin, saying, “If it doesn’t work, I’ll find better recipe for another poison, or I might use my gun when I’ll be able to come. Enjoy! FREE REBEL SPIRIT.”

        Authorities arrested Ferrier while attempting to drive across the U.S.-Canada border while carrying a gun, a knife, and hundreds of rounds of ammunition, authorities said. The letter was intercepted at a mail sorting facility in September 2020, before it could reach the White House.

        In September 2020, Ferrier posted on X, then called Twitter, that someone should “please shoot [T]rump in the face.”

        Ferrier told the judge that she considers herself a “peaceful and genuinely kind person” but admitted she gets angry about problems like unfairness, abuses of power and “stupid rules.” She also said she considers herself to be an “activist” rather than a “terrorist.”

        U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich handed down the 262-month sentence outlined in a plea agreement with prosecutors, which also would expel Ferrier from the U.S. once she is released from prison. She will be required to be under supervised release for life, if she ever returns.

        Prosecutor Michael Friedman called the sentence an “appropriately harsh punishment” that sends a clear message.

        “There is absolutely no place for politically motivated violence in the United States of America,” he said. “There is no excuse for threatening public officials or targeting our public servants.”

        1...414243...65Page 42 of 65
        © Great America News Desk 2022