Opinion

Home Opinion

Biden’s Pick for Chairman of Joint Chiefs Used Racist Hiring Practices

5
David B. Gleason from Chicago, IL, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

ANALYSIS – In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision striking down Affirmative Action at top universities as unconstitutional, the same race-based policies used to achieve ‘diversity’ elsewhere are being scrutinized nationwide, including at the Pentagon. 

And now we learn that Joe Biden’s pick to replace Army General Mark Milley as the next Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, himself had racist hiring practices. 

That could make him ineligible to be the nation’s top military officer.

Air Force General Charles Q. (CQ) Brown, a man of color, is accused of making “discriminatory comments and potential unlawful impact on military personnel,” according to the American Accountability Foundation (AFF).

The AFF was set up in early 2021 to expose the leftist backgrounds of Biden’s top nominees. 

Multiple sources have reported that Brown made statements while chief of staff for the Air Force and during his previous tour as Pacific Air Forces commander suggesting that he hired personnel and promoted them based on race, rather than merit, to force diversity in the Air Force.

“Race-based hiring has no place in the military. Our men and women in uniform deserve to be led on missions by the most qualified and skilled officers and leaders our nation has, who will give them the best chance of success and getting home safely,” said the AFF in a statement.

Considering the accusations against Brown, the AAF filed a complaint with the Air Force Inspector General and requested an official investigation into Brown’s allegedly discriminatory comments and practices.

As the Daily Caller (DC) reported:

While serving as the Air Force’s chief of staff and before that as Pacific Air Forces commander, Brown made statements suggesting he selects individuals for certain roles and promotions based on their race to build purposefully diverse organizations, multiple sources show. Brown could be violating the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause that prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, the American Accountability Foundation (AAF) argues, making him ineligible to become the next chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

The DC added:

If Brown has acted upon his “publicly stated beliefs on what should be official hiring policy of the U.S. Air Force [race-based hiring], it would present a significant likelihood of violating the civil and constitutional rights of military personnel” as well as Department of Defense (DOD) codes of conduct, AAF said.

And records appear to show that Brown did exactly that.  Brown’s diversity policies appear to have prioritized bringing on non-white officers and recruits. The Air Force Times reported that 2022, Brown changed the Air Force’s demographic goals for officers to 67% of them being white, down from 80% in 2014. 

But things have only gotten worse under Brown. According to a February 2023 Air Force newsletter, the Air Force also recently pledged to track officer promotions based on “race, ethnicity and gender.”

So now the discrimination Brown has implemented isn’t only against white men, its against straight white men as well.

I agree with AFF’s concerns, if these allegations are confirmed they should make ‘CQ Brown ineligible to serve as the next chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. And the United States Senate should not confirm him to that lofty role.

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

Trump Appeals To Supreme Court Over Colorado Banning Him From Ballot

1
Duncan Lock, Dflock, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

ANALYSIS – This could be huge. Donald Trump is appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court – which he helped shape as president – following a ruling in Colorado to bar him from its presidential primary ballot over his engagement in an “insurrection.”

Colorado’s all Democrat appointed, left-leaning Supreme Court has ruled 4 to 3 that former President Donald Trump is disqualified from holding office again because he engaged in an “insurrection” over the U.S. Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021.

Republicans see the Colorado court’s decision as yet another egregious example of the Democrats’ ongoing campaign of election interference against Trump.

The majority justices’ decision reversed a Denver district judge’s finding last month that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment did not apply to the presidency.

The three justices who dissented did so on procedural grounds. In three separate dissenting opinions, each based on different legal arguments, they all concluded that the Colorado Supreme Court had overstepped its authority.

Colorado’s decision will go into effect on Jan. 4, 2024 – the eve of Colorado’s March 5 Republican primary.

In the wake of the decision, Team Trump came out swinging. As The New York Times reported:

“Unsurprisingly, the all-Democrat appointed Colorado Supreme Court has ruled against President Trump, supporting a Soros-funded, left-wing group’s scheme to interfere in an election on behalf of Crooked Joe Biden by removing President Trump’s name from the ballot and eliminating the rights of Colorado voters to vote for the candidate of their choice,” a campaign spokesman, Steven Cheung, said. “We have full confidence that the U.S. Supreme Court will quickly rule in our favor and finally put an end to these un-American lawsuits.”

Similar challenges in New Hampshire, Michigan and Minnesota have all been dismissed in court, because the idea is nonsense. The courts there also decided that the Constitution is unclear about whether Section 3 of the 14th Amendment applies to the president.

As Trump’s lawyers have already said he will appeal the verdict. The shock ruling will put an exceptional case before the U.S. Supreme Court – possibly being forced to decide the question for all 50 U.S. states.

The U.S. Supreme Court is made up of nine justices, six of whom are conservatives, or “constitutionalists,” three of whom were appointed by President Trump.

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

This article was republished with permission from American Liberty News.

Credible US Officials Testify to Congress About Real UFO Threat

1

ANALYSIS – Decades after the infamous Roswell incident captivated Americans, the House of Representatives has convened a landmark panel on Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAPs), also known as Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs).

In what would have been unimaginable just a few years ago, the hearing is the most serious acknowledgment yet that the mysterious sightings require scrutiny at the highest levels of government.

The debate about UAP has become a hot topic in recent years following multiple leaked photographs and video recordings from the U.S. Navy showing UAP craft operating at high speed over American airspace, often with no visible propulsion and maneuvering in ways that baffle aeronautics experts.

A leaked navy video, captured in July 2019, for example, shows a sphere-shaped unidentified object flying over water near San Diego before apparently disappearing into the ocean.

At the hearing, three witnesses testified under oath about their experiences with UFOs. Significantly, former military and intelligence officials testified to the panel Wednesday that they have seen UFOs and said they could pose risks to national security. 

All three witnesses said the UAP may be probing for weakness in the U.S. military system.

The highly credible former officials called for the U.S. government to share what it knows about the phenomena.

But the Pentagon’s UAP task force, the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office, says it hasn’t been able to substantiate claims that any federal programs have possessed or reverse-engineered extraterrestrial materials.

Still, during two hours of testimony on July 26, three witnesses shared their encounters with flying objects that they say defy explanation:

1) David Grusch, an ex-Air Force intelligence officer, claims the U.S. has been running a secret program to retrieve and reverse engineer UAPs for decades, and has been aware of “non-human” activity since the 1930s.

Grusch said he believes the U.S. government is in possession of UAP based on interviewing 40 witnesses over four years with direct knowledge of the program. 

Perhaps more sensationally, in response to a question regarding aliens, he replied “biologics [life forms] came with some of these [UAP] recoveries.”

2) Ryan Graves, a former navy fighter pilot, testified his squadron repeatedly encountered mysterious flying objects which could remain stationary despite hurricane-level winds – claiming he saw them off the Atlantic coast “every day for at least a couple years.”

The Wall Street Journal reported on one sighting:

Graves said his aircrew saw UAP during a training exercise off the coast of Virginia Beach, Va. Two jets encountered “a dark gray or black cube inside of a clear sphere” and the object came within 50 feet of the lead aircraft, he said. It was estimated to be 5 to 15 feet in diameter, he said.

3) Retired U.S. Navy commander David Fravor recounted a 2004 encounter with a “Tic Tac” shaped UAP that moved in a way that baffled aviators. Fravor said it had no visible rotors or wings. 

It was “moving very abruptly over the white water, like a ping-pong ball,” he added, noting that he flew his aircraft closer to get a better view of the UAP, but “it rapidly accelerated and disappeared.”

But this is only the latest and most significant public inquiry into the UFO threat.

In 2021 the U.S. intelligence agencies were called to deliver a report on Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP) to Congress.

The first unclassified report from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) made public what the Pentagon reportedly knows about UAP, renewing interest in the mysterious objects which have grown into a modern myth in American society.

ODNI produced a second UAP report in 2022.

Whether UAP is the result of advanced foreign technology or from a more otherworldly source, government officials are now demanding to know more about them. And so is the public.

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

Republican Governor Crowns Kamala The Winner Of ABC Debate

5
Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu (R) called Vice President Kamala Harris the clear winner of Tuesday night’s presidential debate.

“Oh, Kamala definitely won the debate,” Sununu said during a Wednesday morning appearance on CNN. “There’s no question about that. So the question is, what does it mean, right? And it’s not just, what does it mean to everybody? What’s going to do that 10 percent of swing voters?” 

“I think if you poll those swing voters, they want results,” he said. “They’re results-driven. It’s the cost of living, it’s the border, it’s public safety, those types of issues, you can be the change agent to make that better in their lives.” 

The outgoing New Hampshire governor, who considered a presidential run of his own, praised Harris’s debate strategy Tuesday night.

“She kind of talked confidence in her answers, and then she took the last 30 seconds of almost every question and hit him with a personal attack, knowing that that would get under his skin,” Sununu said. “It was a very effective measure, and I give her a lot of credit on that. It kept him on the defensive, to be sure, and it’s ultimately, definitely, stylistically, why she openly won the debate.” 

Sununu said the debate would move the needle “a little bit,” but argued neither candidate explained to voters how they would help lower costs for average Americans. The GOP governor added Trump failed to take advantage of openings to go on the offense over the economy.

“He should have talked about price controls,” Sununu said. “He should have talked about the cost of living more. I think he went like an hour, not even talking about inflation and those are real issues.” 

Sununu said the ex-president should also draw a bigger contrast on foreign policy with Harris, saying on CNN there “was clearly more peace when”  he was in office. 

“That is a strength that he has, that he has not exploited in this campaign,” he said. “There is chaos in Ukraine, chaos in Israel. You know, there’s a lot of pressure going on in Taiwan. Let’s not forget about that. Let’s not forget about Afghanistan.”

Amanda Head: Highlights From Devon Archer’s Testimony

1
Amanda Head

See everything you missed from Devon Archer’s testimony on Capitol Hill.

Watch Amanda explain the situation below:

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

Inside DOGE: Elon Musk’s Bold Move To Rewiring Federal Thinking

Screenshot via X [Credit: @amuse]

In the history of American bureaucracy, few ideas have carried the sting of satire and the force of reform as powerfully as Steve Davis’s $1 credit card limit. It is a solution so blunt, so absurd on its face, that only a government so accustomed to inertia could have missed it for decades. And yet, here it is, at the center of a sprawling audit by the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, that has, in just seven weeks, eliminated or disabled 470,000 federal charge cards across thirty agencies. The origin of this initiative reveals more than cleverness or thrift. It reflects a new attitude, one that insists the machinery of government need not be calcified. The federal workforce, long derided as passive and obstructionist, is now being challenged to solve problems, not explain why they cannot be solved. This, more than any tally of dollars saved, may be DOGE’s greatest achievement.

When Elon Musk assumed control of DOGE under President Trump’s second administration, he brought with him an instinct for disruption. But disruption, as many reformers have learned, is often easier said than done. Take federal credit cards. There were, as of early 2025, roughly 4.6 million active accounts across the federal government, while the civilian workforce comprised fewer than 3 million employees. Even the most charitable reading suggests gross redundancy. More cynical observers see potential for abuse. DOGE asked the obvious question: why so many cards? The initial impulse was to cancel them outright. But as is often the case in government, legality is not aligned with simplicity.

Enter Steve Davis. Known for his austere management style and history with Musk-led enterprises, Davis encountered legal counsel who informed him that mass cancellation would breach existing contracts, violate administrative rules, and risk judicial entanglement. Most would stop there. But Davis, adhering to Musk’s ethos of first-principles thinking, chose another route. If the cards could not be canceled, could they be rendered functionally useless? Yes. Set their limits to $1.

This workaround achieved in days what years of audits and Inspector General warnings had not. The cards remained technically active, sidestepping the legal landmines of cancellation, but were practically neutered. The act was swift, surgical, and reversible. It allowed agencies to petition for exemptions in cases of genuine operational need, but forced every cardholder and department head to justify the existence of each card. Waste thrives in opacity. The $1 cap turned on the lights.

Naturally, the immediate reaction inside many agencies was panic. At the National Park Service, staff could not process trash removal contracts. At the FDA, scientific research paused as laboratories found themselves unable to order reagents. At the Department of Defense, travel for civilian personnel ground to a halt. Critics likened it to a shutdown, albeit without furloughs. Others, more charitable, described it as a stress test. And indeed, that is precisely what it was: a large-scale audit conducted not by paper trails and desk reviews, but by rendering all purchases impossible and observing who protested, why, and with what justification.

This approach reflects a deeper philosophical question. What is government for? Is it a perpetuator of routine, or a servant of necessity? The DOGE initiative, in its credit card audit, insisted that nothing in government spending ought to be assumed sacred or automatic. Every purchase, every expense, must be rooted in mission-critical need. And for that to happen, a culture shift must occur, not merely in policy, but in mindset. The federal worker must no longer be an apologist for the status quo, but an agent of reform.

Remarkably, this message has found traction. Inside the agencies affected by the freeze, DOGE has reported a surge in what one official described as “constructive dissent.” Civil servants who once reflexively recited reasons for inaction are now offering alternative mechanisms, revised workflows, and digital solutions. One employee at the Department of Agriculture proposed consolidating regional office supply chains after realizing that over a dozen separate cardholders were purchasing duplicative items within the same week. A NOAA field team discovered it could pool resources for bulk procurement, saving money and reducing redundancy. These are not acts of whistleblowing or radical restructuring. They are small, localized acts of efficiency, and they matter.

Critics argue that these are marginal gains and that the real drivers of federal bloat lie elsewhere: entitlement spending, defense procurement, or healthcare subsidies. And they are not wrong. But they miss the point. DOGE’s $1 limit was not about accounting minutiae, it was about psychology. In a system where inertia reigns, a symbolic shock is often the necessary prelude to substantive reform. The act of asking why, why this card, why this purchase, why this employee, forces a reappraisal that scales. Culture, not just cost, was the target.

There is a danger here, of course. Symbolism can become performance, and austerity can become vanity. If agencies are deprived of necessary tools for the sake of headlines, then reform becomes sabotage. This is why the $1 policy included an appeals process, a mechanism for restoring functionality where needed. In a philosophical sense, this is the principle of proportionality applied to public finance: restrictions should be commensurate with the likelihood of abuse, and reversible upon demonstration of legitimate need.

DOGE’s broader audit, still underway, has now expanded to cover nearly thirty agencies. It is not simply cutting cards. It is classifying them, comparing issuance practices, flagging statistical anomalies, and building a federal dashboard of real-time usage. This is not glamorous work. There are no ribbon-cuttings, no legacy-defining achievements. But it is the marrow of good governance. As Aristotle noted, excellence is not an act, but a habit. The DOGE team has adopted a habit of scrutiny. And that habit, when instilled in the civil service, is a kind of virtue.

Here we arrive at the most profound implication. What if the federal workforce is not inherently wasteful or cynical, but simply trapped in a system that rewards compliance over creativity? What if, when given both the mandate and the moral permission to think, civil servants become problem solvers? The $1 limit policy is, in this light, less a budgetary tool than a pedagogical one. It teaches. It asks employees to imagine how their department might function if every dollar mattered, and to act accordingly.

In a bureaucratic culture where the phrase “we can’t do that” serves as both shield and apology, DOGE has introduced a new mantra: try. Try to find the workaround. Try to reimagine procurement. Try to do more with less. This shift may not register on a spreadsheet. It may not win an election. But it rehumanizes the federal workforce. It treats them not as drones executing policy, but as intelligent actors capable of judgment, reform, and even invention.

The future of DOGE will no doubt face resistance. Unions, entrenched bureaucrats, and political opponents will argue it oversteps or misunderstands the delicate machinery of governance. Some of that criticism will be valid. But what cannot be denied is that DOGE has already achieved something rare: it has made federal workers think differently. It has shown that even the most byzantine of systems contains levers for change—if one is willing to pull them.

The $1 card limit is not a policy; it is a parable. It tells us that in the face of complexity, simplicity is a virtue. That in the face of inertia, audacity has a place. And that in the face of sprawling bureaucracies, sometimes the best way to fix the machine is to unplug it and see who calls to complain. That is when the real work begins.

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.

READ NEXT: Federal Judge Blocks Hugely Popular Trump-Backed Reform

New FBI Records Reveal Warnings About Suspicious Individual Before Sniper Attack On Trump

0

A stash of newly-released documents reveal FBI, Secret Service and other officials noted a suspicious person carrying bags and scouting security measures in the hours before a sniper attempted to kill President Donald Trump in Butler, Penn., but no one seems to have taken any action to investigate.

The non-profit public interest law firm Judicial Watch announced in a statement it “forced the release of 37 heavily redacted pages from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit revealing that law enforcement personnel broadcast radio warnings about an ‘unknown male acting suspiciously’ prior to the attempted assassination of then-candidate Donald Trump at a July 13, 2024, rally in Butler, PA. These are the first records the FBI has released about the Butler assassination attempt on Trump.”

“These documents raise troubling new questions about Secret Service failures to protect President Trump.  And it shouldn’t have taken years and a federal lawsuit to get this basic FBI material about the near assassination of President Trump,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said.

Judicial Watch reports it “filed the July 2025 lawsuit after the FBI failed to respond to a July 2024 FOIA request (Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:25-cv-02216)). Judicial Watch asked for:”

All records, including but not limited to, investigative reports, interview summaries (Forms 1023), letterhead memoranda, photos, audio/visual recordings, database inquiries, interagency communications, and any other records, whether contained in the Central Records System or cross-referenced files, related to Thomas Matthew Crooks, born September 20, 2003 in Butler Township, PA and died on July 13, 2024, who attempted the assassination of former President Donald Trump on July 13, 2024.

All records of communication in any form, including but not limited to emails, text messages, encrypted app communications and voice recordings, between FBI officials and/or FBI sources, contractors, and assets on the one hand, and Thomas Matthew Crooks on the other hand.

Judicial Watch reports its “records include a July 16, 2024, ‘FD-302’ investigative report that states that on the day of the shooting:”

Prior to the start of the shooting, [Redacted] received reports over the radio about an unknown male acting suspiciously. The unknown male had bags and was wearing a gray T-shirt with “Demolition Ranch” written on the front of it. One report included the unknown male looking at a law enforcement sniper position. Several operators were communicating information about the unknown male back and forth over the radio–including to/from Command, to the Secret Service, to PSP [PA State Police], to “everybody.”

Judicial Watch’s statement reports:

A July 15 electronic communication titled “Opening EC for Investigation of Thomas Matthew Crooks” that launched the FBI investigation of Thomas Crooks notes that one purpose of the investigation, given that Crooks himself was killed by Secret Service agents, was to determine “the subject’s motivation and to identify if there were any co-conspirators.” 

A July 14 investigative report describes an unidentified acquaintance of Thomas Crooks and his family, the acquaintance indicated that sometime between May and June 2024, Crooks “was dehydrated and needed to be taken to the hospital.” It continued, “[Redacted] stated that she thought it was strange that [redacted] did not take him to the hospital themselves.” 

A July 16 electronic communication states that on the previous day, the FBI returned a flip phone seized as evidence in their investigation of Crooks, and that that “Lead is fully covered.”

A July 16 report notes that on the previous day a person who was apparently a neighbor, described the Crooks family as “normal, nice people” and that Crooks “seemed like a normal dorky kid.”

A July 16 electronic communication details that acting on a tip, sent to the FBI regarding a “concerning” Facebook post regarding Crooks’ attempted assassination of Trump:

Facebook “Damn, bad shot. Would have done the world a service” and another comment on the original post “We should watched his ficking brains brains blown away.” The tipster also provided the Facebook page that posted this was [redacted]. 

A July 16 electronic communication indicates that a business card was located at the crime scene of Trump’s attempted assassination, and the person associated with it was investigated, although nothing derogatory about that individual was identified in law enforcement records. An interview of that individual was recommended.

A July 16 interview report states that investigators talked with an individual who had attended the Butler rally:

[Redacted] recalled that approximately 5 minutes after the shots were fired, a light silver Subaru Hatchback sped past her and almost struck her. [Redacted] didn’t remember the vehicle having any stickers or distinct markings. [Redacted] didn’t get a look at the license plate, but believed the driver to be an older white male with short hair and tan skin. [Redacted] saw the Subaru in the parking lot near houses specifically a brown house with a pool. The vehicle departed the parking lot making a sharp right turn near the old buildings.

[Redacted] was with [redacted] in the parking lot and observed the vehicle too. [Redacted] described the vehicle as a 2017 silver Subaru Forester…. [Redacted] noted the terrain was too rough to drive at the rate of speed the Subaru was doing. [Redacted] thought the incident with the vehicle occurred maybe 10 minutes after the shooting.

A July 16 interview report details the observations of a member of the Saxonburg Police Department who was also a member of the Butler Emergency Services Unit:

[Redacted] was on the counter assault team. His position was in the turret inside the armor vehicle next to the barns behind the stage. [Redacted] stated sniper teams called out and sent photos of a suspicious person with a range finder. [Redacted] stated he watched a guy fitting the description walking from the water tower to the stage area and out of view. He did not see anything on the individual.

[Redacted] stated prior to anything happening he saw four people one child walking away from the AGR [American Glass Research] building towards the houses then two units took off in the direction of where the shooter was later found. A call came out over the radio of a long gun on the roof. Shortly after shots started going off. [Redacted] rode in the armor behind the tents near the stage, but did not ever have a view of the roof where the shooter was. [Redacted] ran out of the armor vehicle with a ladder to AGR and was told they didn’t need any more guys on the roof. So he came back and held security for a medic working on the deceased individual. The Secret Service then took over the tent.

In a July 16 interview summary of an individual who had attended the Butler rally:

[S]he noticed a white male with dark hair interacting with a uniformed law enforcement officer. They both were seen looking at two open windows of the property/building adjacent to the AGR Building. The white male told the officer that those windows were not supposed to be open. [Redacted] saw the windows that appeared to be opened from the inside. As the officer walked around towards the other side of the building, the white male stood on the side where the windows were facing towards the event/stage.  

Shortly thereafter, at approximately some time after 6PM, she heard another white male yell the following, “He’s got a gun, everybody run!” This white male appeared to be in his late [redacted] who was seen wearing a white shirt, who had dark colored hair and a [redacted]. She remembered seeing a “panicked” look on his face. After he yelled, [redacted] heard six gunshots that sounded like they came from the two open windows. She took [redacted] and ran towards the vehicle along with many others from the crowd. She lost [redacted] in the crowd but continued running towards the vehicle with [redacted] and another white male who helped with getting [redacted] to the vehicle. She eventually located [redacted] with the help of the same male.

She recalled seeing the law enforcement officer wearing a brown/tan uniform but she did not see the patch.

When she returned to the vehicle, she recalled seeing the Suburban still parked behind her with no occupants inside. She departed the scene shortly thereafter.

After reflection, [Redacted] thought the security outside of the fence line was a concern because there was a lot of open access. She did not see anybody screening individuals near or outside the fence line.

[Redacted] told agents that she does not support conspiracy theorist or is one but she wanted to provide this information to investigators just in case it would help with the investigation.

A July 16 interview report details the observations of a member of the Slippery Rock Police Department who was also a member of the Butler Emergency Services Unit:

Once Trump started to move toward the stage, [redacted] and the Bravo squad were prepared to move in the armored vehicle. At that time, a report came in over the radio stating there was a male on one of the roofs ([redacted] was not sure which roof) and that the male had a long gun.

Almost immediately after the report came over the radio, [redacted] heard several gunshots. [Redacted] was not sure how many, possibly seven or eight shots. The Bravo squad then responded in the armored vehicle to the grand stand. When they arrived, they exited the armored vehicle and pushed up the grand stand. They were there briefly, attempting to determine what was happening, and then pulled back. At that time, [Redacted] observed a male on the ground with a gun shot wound to his chest. The team then formed a tight perimeter around the medics as they addressed the injured male.

The Secret Service then requested a tactical team to provide security at the Butler Hospital. [Redacted] and three other operators drove the armored vehicle to the hospital and formed a hard perimeter around the outside of the hospital and the helicopter landing pad. [Redacted] stayed there until they “took Donald Trump out.”

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

Fighting Back Against Trans ‘Drag Story Time’ Imposed on Our Kids in Public Libraries

3

ANALYSIS – Conservatives are finally fighting back against the trans agenda being imposed on our children at public libraries and bookstores via ‘Drag Queen Story Times.’ 

This bizarre and offensive program sends outrageously outfitted cross-dressing men into public libraries to read stories to small impressionable children. 

The goal? To indoctrinate, if not groom, these children into accepting and exploring the trans lifestyle. 

The secondary effect, exposing children to sexual themes, including mock stripping, they have no right to be exposing them to. 

In some cases, these grown men dressed as women have been caught fondling children or acting inappropriately.

And yet, our taxpayer-funded public libraries across the country allow these bizarre events.

And too many ignorant, brainwashed, horrible parents allow their children to attend.

They are also increasingly occurring at other venues as well. But the goals are always the same.

Thankfully, conservatives are finally fighting back.

One way has been by loudly and publicly calling out examples of sexual abuse, and inappropriate touching or sexual behavior by these drag queens, and by protesting their presence in front of small children.

In early December one Trans-friendly venue, The Starlighter, in Texas was forced to cancel a slew of drag queen story hours after a public outcry over the outrageous antics of some of these cross-dressing men.

Most of it was due to video and images taken at an event and widely shared by conservative critics.

The Christian Post reported that this event featured a showing of the 1960s TV classic “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer” while a rainbow flag with the number “666” hung on the walls.

What was worse, a video taken at this event showed a young girl no older than 7, who appeared unattended, with these men in drag dancing suggestively and singing lyrics such as, “Under the mistletoe/ Yes, everybody knows/ We will take off our clothes.”

One of the cross-dressing men was also recorded touching and stroking the young girl’s hair. The little girl is also seen handing money to one of the drag performers, as if at a strip club.

Another video clip, reports the Christian Post, “showed the young child visibly shrink back as a drag queen in all black leather, devil horns and face makeup as the man in drag sings, ‘Get your tickets to the freak show, baby / Step right up to watch the freak go crazy.’”

Another way conservatives are fighting back is protesting loudly and aggressively like the Left does, constantly, and at the drop of a hat.

But doing so peacefully.

In one case in early December reported NBC News:

The hosts of a “Drag Queen Story Hour”-style event for children in Columbus, Ohio, on Saturday pulled the plug because of what they described as the intimidating presence of right-wing demonstrators.

The scheduled holiday themed “Holi-Drag Storytime” at the First Unitarian Church of Columbus, which runs the K-5 institution behind the event, Red Oak Community School, was canceled at the last-minute Saturday morning following internal discussions, organizers said.

Members of Ohio’s Proud Boys organization and other right-wing groups made good on promises to make waves outside the venue Saturday. More than 50 demonstrators, including members of the Proud Boys, gathered near the church Saturday morning and shouted, chanted and held up signs. Some were armed with long guns.

This appears to be a very effective technique, learned from the Left. Speak loudly, and carry a big stick.

But then there is another way to counter this insidiously harmful movement’s efforts targeting our children. 

That way is to promote a wholesome, Christian, family-focused counter-narrative and events at these same venues. And threaten legal action if they discriminate against you, or refuse to allow it.

As Newsmax reported, actor and author Kirk Cameron said recently: “Conservatives need to stop being on defense against the culture and start going on offense to take it back.

He added:

Just complaining about the culture doesn’t change the culture. We’ve got to get off the defense, to get on the offense. And I think for decades, we as concerned citizens, as people who understand the importance of faith and morality, have been asleep. And when we’re asleep, we’re unaware and we’re unengaged.

Cameron added that now that we’ve woken up, if we remain unengaged, “that’s on us.”

Newsmax continued:

Cameron then called on every parent and grandparent to take their favorite children’s book that has wholesome values, good and godly morals, and call their library if it has hosted a Drag Story Hour and ask if they can read their book during story hour.

“If they say ‘no,'” Cameron said, “they’re likely breaking the law; and you can contact us at Bravebooks.com. We’ll show you how to host your own story hour, will donate to you a free book with all the instructions and guidance.

“And I personally put some of these libraries on notice with a public letter that says, ‘I hope you’ll reconsider; here’s a free book. But if you double down, I’m prepared to assert my constitutional rights in court,'” Cameron stated.

So, the peaceful fight against depravity continues. Pick your fighting style, and get engaged. GAND

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

Is Your Name In This Biden Citizen Spying Database?

2
Joe Biden via Gage Skidmore Flickr

The federal government has been spying on millions of private gun sales and spying on American citizens without a constitutionally-mandated warrant as part of a nationwide gun control scheme.

The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee reports committee chairman Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) sent a letter to Acting ATF Director Daniel Driscoll, “requesting information on a secretive program that appears to allow the federal government to monitor law-abiding Americans attempting to exercise their Second Amendment rights.”

“This kind of backdoor surveillance of American citizens—without due process or public disclosure—should alarm every single person who values the Bill of Rights,” said Paul. “The ATF and FBI have no business creating secret watchlists for law-abiding Americans seeking to purchase firearms. It’s unacceptable, and I intend to get answers.”

“An activist judge subjected GOA to a ‘gag order’ after the Biden Administration mistakenly gave us information related to its unlawful NICS Monitoring program. ATF and FBI have no business monitoring the gun purchases of American citizens. GOA has since learned that the FBI abused NICS Monitoring to enforce California’s ‘assault weapons’ ban. We are thankful to Chairman Paul and the Senate Homeland Security Committee for opening an investigation into this egregious violation of Second and Fourth Amendment rights,” said Aidan Johnston, Director of Federal Affairs, Gun Owners of America.

The committee reports Paul’s letter “follows reporting based on a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request by Gun Owners of America, which revealed the existence of the NICS Audit Log Review (Monitoring) system. The Biden Administration’s ATF mistakenly released unredacted documents exposing the system, and has reportedly spent years trying to cover it up ever since.”

“According to the exposed documents, the program enables ATF agents to request that the FBI flag and monitor specific individuals using data from the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), often for extended periods of time—without those individuals ever knowing,” the committee reports.

The committee reprots Paul “demands that the ATF provide unredacted records showing how many Americans have been subjected to this monitoring, for what reasons, the legal basis for the program, whether it has led to prosecutions, and whether there has been any misuse by ATF personnel or contractors. The records must be submitted to the committee no later than 5:00 pm on April 24th, 2025.”

Dr. Paul highlights in his letter that “the existence of this surveillance program, and the ATF’s longstanding push to conceal it from the public, raise questions about its general use and its potential to infringe on Americans’ civil liberties.”

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

Court Asked To Rule Against Trump Prosecutor Who Failed To Respond To Record Lawsuit

2
Gavel via Wikimedia Commons Image

A high profile conservative law firm is asking a Georgia court to enter a default judgment against anti-Trump prosecutor and liberal Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, after Willis failed to respond to a lawsuit demanding documents detailing her coordination with Washington liberals in Trump’s case.

The non-profit public interest law firm Judicial Watch announced it “has asked the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia, to declare a default judgment against District Attorney Fani Willis in Judicial Watch’s lawsuit seeking records of communications Willis had with Special Counsel Jack Smith and the House January 6 Committee.”

The motion was filed after Willis simply refused to respond to Judicial Watch’s suit seeking what are supposed to be publicly-available records.

“I think this is the first time in Judicial Watch’s thirty years that a government official failed to answer an open records lawsuit in court,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said. “This further shows Ms. Willis has something to hide about her collusion with the Biden administration and Nancy Pelosi’s Congress on her unprecedented and compromised ‘get-Trump’ prosecution.”

“The lawsuit was filed in the Superior Court of Fulton County, GA, after Willis and the county denied having any records responsive to an August 2023 Georgia Open Records Act request for communications with the Special Counsel’s office and/or the January 6 Committee (Judicial Watch Inc. v. Fani Willis et al. (No. 24-CV-002805)). (Judicial Watch dismissed Fulton County from the lawsuit.),” Judicial Watch notes.

Judicial Watch notes Willis “was served with the lawsuit on March 11, 2024, but that she has not yet answered it,” writing in its motion:

Defendant has not filed an answer and no answer has been served upon [Judicial Watch].… Defendant’s answer was due 30 days after service, or on April 10, 2024. Pursuant to [Georgia law] the case automatically became in default when an answer was not filed by the due date. Further pursuant to that Code section, Defendant was permitted as a matter of right to open the default within 15 days of the day of default, or by April 25, 2024.

Judicial Watch asserts it “is now entitled to a verdict and judgment by default.”

By all accounts, Willis coordinated her case with some liberals in Washington, and has records that Judicial Watch and the public are legally entitled to see.

In its lawsuit Judicial Watch states that Willis’ “representation about not having records responsive to the request is likely false.”

Judicial Watch points to “a December 5, 2023, letter from House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan to Willis that cites a December 2021, letter from Willis to then-House January 6 Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson. In that letter Willis requested assistance from the committee and offered to travel to DC.”

Judicial Watch also cited “news reports and other records which ‘indicate that representatives of Willis’s office traveled to Washington, DC, and met with January 6 Select Committee staffers in April, May, and November 2022, as Willis proposed in her December 17, 2021 letter …’”

Judicial Watch is assisted in the case by John Monroe of John Monroe Law in Georgia.

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