After Bud Light’s major misstep consumers are looking for ways to make sure their hard-earned dollars go toward companies and institutions that respect their values.
Watch Amanda explain the situation below:
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – As I have repeatedly written about, here, here, and here, the politicization at the higher levels of the FBI, and to degree at DHS (Department of Homeland Security), and other federal law enforcement agencies, is one of the gravest threats facing our Republic and our Constitutional liberties today.
The danger is widespread and involves the Bureau straying well into illegal domestic spying and censorship.
The possible crimes go from FBI collusion with Big Tech (Twitter, Facebook, et al,) to censor Americans who may criticize certain government-approved narratives, to creating an entire army of analysts, and agents exclusively devoted to pursuing a vaguely defined, virtually nonexistent, ‘domestic terror’ threat.
The latter being an aggressive pursuit many see as a thinly veiled attempt to target, coerce and silence conservatives simply.
It also extends to ignoring widespread violence against pro-life churches and nonprofits to using heavy-handed storm trooper tactics against unarmed peaceful pro-life protesters.
Much has been recently uncovered about the FBI collusion with Twitter, thanks to Elon Musk and his Twitter files.
And the Bureau’s heavy-handed and tone-deaf response blaming any criticism of the FBI as coming from ‘conspiracy theorists’ spreading ‘misinformation,’ made them appear even more obtuse, and dangerous.
Some, including me, have called for thorough house cleaning at the Bureau, especially at the top where much of the rot appears to be concentrated.
As I have always said, the vast majority of the employees, analysts and field agents at the FBI are honorable, decent, American patriots.
But the same can no longer be said for much of the current leadership.
At the root of the problem is the FBI steadily giving up its traditional independence within the Department of Justice (DOJ), which has basically taken over the Bureau.
One way to start cleaning house is to create an independent commission modeled after the, yes – sometimes overzealous, 1970s Senate ‘Church Committee’ that uncovered abuses at the CIA, NSA, and FBI, to investigate the FBI again, and impose significant reforms.
And now we have another senior FBI official, ex-FBI Assistant Director Chris Swecker, publicly saying the same thing.
The well-regarded Swecker retired as the assistant director for criminal investigations after 24 years at the FBI.
Just the News reports that Swecker argues that the bureau’s problems start with the politicization of its ranks by the DOJ.
The news outlet adds:
“What I see is that it’s basically a wholesale takeover by the Department of Justice, which is filled with political appointees in every top position, and then by extension, right into the administration,” Swecker said in a wide-ranging interview on the John Solomon Reports podcast.
“You see DOJ people — and many of the top executive positions inside the FBI now — you see people that have made a career out of bouncing in and out of silk-stocking law firms between the Department of Justice and then these law firms. And I have to say they are incredibly liberal in their politics. And that has now sort of taken over the FBI, and they are inserting that ideology into their high-profile investigations.”
Just the News continues:
Swecker said the FBI’s involvement in labeling school parents “domestic terrorists,” and its “bare-knuckles” pursuit of Donald Trump contrasted with its “kid gloves cases” against Hillary Clinton, Andrew McCabe and Hunter Biden have not only shaken public trust but also the internal confidence of the FBI.
As the outlet noted, the FBI “has yielded the independence Congress gave it under the law and is now subservient to a group of liberal ideologues inside the Justice Department who have pressured agents to stray into unwarranted domestic spying and censorship.”
This is dangerously un-American and is one of the biggest threats to our Republic and our liberties. It’s time to really investigate and shake things up at the FBI.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
Congressional investigators are demanding additional documents and information from financial institutions nationwide amid revelations that a Biden administration operation to spy on millions of bank accounts to identify suspected January 6 rioters was even more widespread than previously reported.
U.S. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) sent letters to the Chief Executive Officers of Standard Chartered Bank USA, Truist, U.S. Bank, Wells Fargo, Western Union, Charles Schwab, Bank of America, Citibank, HSBC Bank, JPMorgan Chase, MUFG Bank, PayPal, and Santander Bank requesting “documents and communications related to the Committee’s investigation of financial surveillance of American citizens, including the disclosure of private financial records to federal authorities without legal process.”
“Documents obtained by the Committee and Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government show that the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) circulated specific materials to these banks, and the Committee believes that these banking institutions possess information necessary for the investigation,” the Judiciary Committee reports.
“The Committee previously sent letters to Bank of America, Chase, U.S. Bank, Wells Fargo, Citibank, and Truist for its probe into how the FBI worked together with banks to spy on Americans following the events of January 6, 2021, without a warrant,” the Committee reports.
“The Committee also sent a letter to U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen demanding all Bank Secrecy Act filings, including Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs), that included the tag created to group all SARs related to the events following January 6, 2021,” the Committee adds.
Excerpts of Jordan’s letter to Charles Schwab, for example, read:
“After receiving documents and information from several entities, the Committee and Select Subcommittee learned that the financial surveillance occurring in the United States is much broader than the FBI simply requesting, without any legal process, a list of customers’ transactions from Bank of America. On March 6, 2024, the Committee and Select Subcommittee released an interim staff report detailing its findings to date on how federal law enforcement is using private banks to pry into the private transactions of American customers. That report highlighted how, following January 6, 2021, federal law enforcement commandeered financial institutions’ databases, sought to treat sweeping classes of otherwise lawful transactions as potentially ‘suspicious,’ and profiled Americans using Merchant Category Codes (MCCs), ‘typologies,’ and ‘indicators’ that treated protected political and religious expression as indicative of domestic violent extremism.
“The Committee and Select Subcommittee remain concerned about how and to what extent federal law enforcement and financial institutions continue to spy on Americans by weaponizing backdoor information sharing and casting sprawling classes of transactions, purchase behavior, and protected political or religious expression as potentially ‘suspicious’ or indicative of ‘extremism.'”
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
George Santos did not stretch the truth. He did not fudge numbers. He did not run afoul of technicalities in campaign finance law. He stole, lied, and exploited vulnerable people for personal and political gain. These were not victimless crimes, nor were they victimless lies. They were part of an elaborate scheme to build a fraudulent political career on a foundation of stolen funds, fictitious wealth, and unearned trust. It is time conservatives stop equivocating. If George Santos were not a thief, he might have been a talented, even promising political figure. But he is a thief, and a spectacularly cynical one at that. He stole from the old and the sick, he stole from donors, he stole from the US taxpayer. He is not a misunderstood maverick or a casualty of overzealous prosecution. He is a con man, and a criminal.
Let us begin, as the law did, with the false image he built. Santos, through deliberate lies to the Federal Election Commission and his own party, fabricated a story of fundraising success. In early 2022, he claimed to have raised over $250,000 in a single quarter from third-party donors, including a personal loan of $500,000 to his own campaign. These were lies. He did not have the money. He did not receive these donations. But this mirage of financial viability was just enough to secure his acceptance into the National Republican Congressional Committee’s “Young Guns” program, granting him financial, logistical, and strategic support. The GOP, believing they were backing a legitimate, self-sustaining candidate, diverted valuable resources to a fraud.
But Santos did not merely fake donor support. He invented donors. Using the identities and financial information of real people, Santos charged their credit cards repeatedly, funneling the proceeds into his campaign, other political committees, and even his own bank account. Nearly a dozen people were victimized, including individuals least capable of defending themselves. One woman, suffering from brain damage, had thousands of dollars withdrawn without her consent. Two elderly men in their eighties, each suffering from dementia, had their identities stolen and their cards charged. These were not passive accounting errors or clerical mistakes. These were acts of intimate, cold exploitation. Santos knew these people, spoke with them, thanked them for their support, and then used their vulnerability against them.
In one egregious instance, a donor who had already given the legal maximum found his credit card charged an additional $15,800 without authorization. Santos disguised this theft by attributing the funds to fabricated family members in his FEC reports, a maneuver that allowed him to continue the ruse while avoiding contribution limits. In another, he charged $12,000 to a donor’s account and deposited the majority into his personal bank. From there, it funded clothing, cosmetics, credit card bills, and gambling trips. The campaign, the candidacy, the public service, all were secondary to a lifestyle of luxury paid for by other people’s money.
Perhaps the most hypocritical of Santos’s frauds involved the pandemic. In 2020, he applied for and received over $24,000 in unemployment benefits from the state of New York. At the time, he was gainfully employed as a regional director at a Florida-based investment firm, earning over $120,000 a year. He did not miss a paycheck. He was not laid off. He did not qualify. And yet, each week, he falsely certified his jobless status, drawing taxpayer-funded aid designed for those hit hardest by COVID-19, the unemployed, the underemployed, the financially desperate. In an act of gall that would be laughable if it were not so despicable, Santos later sponsored legislation in Congress to crack down on pandemic unemployment fraud. The man who stole from the system claimed he would reform it.
Nor did the deception stop there. Santos lied on his congressional financial disclosures, the forms meant to ensure transparency for public officials. He claimed to have earned $750,000 in salary from a private company that paid him nothing. He reported receiving $1 to $5 million in dividends that never existed. He declared hundreds of thousands in bank holdings, when in fact his accounts were often in the low thousands, if not lower. In reality, his only actual income came from the investment firm and the unemployment checks he falsely obtained. The lies were not incidental. They were comprehensive, deliberate, and aimed at creating an illusion of wealth and competence.
Even more brazenly, Santos fabricated an independent expenditure group, a supposed political action committee called RedStone Strategies. He solicited two donors for $25,000 each, promising that the funds would be used for media buys and campaign efforts. They were not. Santos transferred the money into accounts he controlled and spent it on Ferragamo, Hermes, Botox, and credit card bills. This was not merely unethical. It was embezzlement. It was theft. It was a fraud perpetrated with full knowledge and intent.
In total, Santos stole or misappropriated approximately $578,750. The court ordered him to pay $373,749.97 in restitution and to forfeit an additional $205,002.97. These numbers were not speculative. They were calculated against real losses to real people, individuals whose credit was damaged, whose money was siphoned away, whose trust was obliterated. Santos’s 87-month sentence, or just over seven years, was not an outlier in the federal system. It was a typical penalty for this kind of sprawling, malicious financial fraud. Defendants with no political profile, who defrauded the government or private individuals out of hundreds of thousands of dollars, routinely receive similar sentences. That Santos was a congressman did not result in his being singled out. If anything, it spared him scrutiny longer than he deserved.
There is no serious argument for clemency here. Clemency is for excess, for injustice, for punishment that outstrips wrongdoing. Clemency is not for grifters who fake their way into office by stealing from pensioners and pandemic relief funds. One does not defend George Santos by invoking freedom, fairness, or limited government. To the contrary, every dollar Santos stole weakened the legitimacy of our electoral system, diverted support from legitimate candidates, and degraded the moral clarity conservatives must offer in a dishonest age. The true conservative position is to say plainly: this man is a crook.
Yes, Santos was charismatic. Yes, he had a knack for commanding attention. And yes, in another life, with honesty and principle, he might have served well. But we do not excuse embezzlement because the embezzler is clever. We do not overlook theft because the thief is funny. Our movement has spent decades insisting that character matters. If that is still true, then George Santos is not a man to be platformed or pitied. He is a cautionary tale.
Some will argue that Santos’s sentence was harsh. Perhaps. But that is not a reason to pardon him. It is a reason to scrutinize sentencing guidelines for all non-violent financial offenders. Santos should be treated like any other fraudster, no worse, no better. And by that measure, he has been.
Others say we should forgive him because the media was against him. But the media is against every Republican. What makes our side different, or should, is our insistence on personal responsibility. George Santos did what he did. He admitted it. He pled guilty. He is being punished in accordance with the law. He is not a martyr. He is a criminal.
Those who now seek to rebrand Santos as a political prisoner or conservative folk hero are doing damage not only to the movement, but to the truth. And that matters. For if we cannot call theft what it is, if we cannot call fraud what it is, if we cannot reject the normalization of criminality in our own ranks, then we are not a movement of principle. We are just another racket.
If you enjoy my work, please consider subscribing: https://x.com/amuse.
Hollywood actor Woody Harrelson is facing intense criticism after his recent Saturday Night Live appearance…
Watch Amanda break down the scandal below…
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – Your federal tax dollars, hard at work – The far-left l*nacy has taken control of so many formerly respected American institutions, it’s tough for some of them to outdo themselves.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) though wasn’t content just m*sinforming Americans about C*VID-19’s o*igins, risks, m*sking, and l*ckd*wns, it is now promoting l*ftist ins*nity and likely endangering the health of babies.
And it is time for Congress to investigate.
The CDC, with a $12 billion budget and more than 12,000 employees, is an Atlanta-based federal agency tasked with protecting Americans from disease outbreaks and other public health threats. Dr. Rochelle Walensky, ex-head of the CDC under Joe Biden resigned effective June 30, without explanation.
Previously an infectious-diseases specialist at Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital, Walensky had no experience running a government agency prior to being picked for the job by Biden.
The agency recently published advice for ‘tr*ns-id*ntified’ and ‘n*n-bi*ary’ individuals (aka m*n) on how to bre*stfeed their infants, which the health agency called “ch*stfe*ding.”
Biological men who tr*nsition to women can produce a form of br*astmilk by taking a cocktail of h*rmone drugs that mimic the changes a woman’s body undergoes during the late stages of pregnancy and shortly after the birth of a child.
Initially developed for biological women who adopted or had a child via surrogacy and wanted to bre*stfeed, it’s called the N*wman-G*ldfarb pr*tocol, and it tricks the body into l*ctating.
The CDC’s Health Equity Considerations page explains that these bi*logical men don’t need to physically have a child to feed a child from the ch*st: “An individual does not need to have given birth to br*astfeed or ch*stfeed,” the CDC website reads.
The now thoroughly discredited agency also notes that br*astfeeding can be referred to as ‘b*dyfeeding’ which sounds like it’s describing something gr*tesque out of a ho*ror movie.
It notes: “Some families may have other preferred terminology for how they feed their babies, such as nursing, ch*stfeeding, or bo*yf*eding.”
Jay W. Richards, a senior research fellow in religious liberty and civil society at the Heritage Foundation, called for greater review of the health agency from congressional leaders.
He told The Christian Post that the CDC showed a willingness to put politics ahead of public health during C*VID, adding that the “latest debacle” over “ch*stf*eding is even worse.”
Encouraging bi*logical men on off-label g*nder ch*nge drugs to ‘ch*stfeed’ babies is crazy, and risky.
The Christian Posts added:
“The agency seems to be tacitly endorsing males’ chestfeeding’ infants with the help of experimental drug cocktail now proves that the CDC has been captured by an ideology that puts the fetishes of disturbed men over the wellbeing of infants,” Richards stated. “It doesn’t even pretend that these experiments have been carefully tested. Its commitment to so-called ‘health equity’ seems to override any old-timey concerns about the effects of drugs, and weird discharges from male bodies, on defenseless infants.”
The CDC’s endorsement of biological men feeding infants directly from the breast has also received pushback from several health experts, who warn that the long-term impact of the practice is not well-known.
U.S. Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kansas, who served as an Obstetrician for 25 years and delivered over 5,000 babies, said in a statement that the CDC statement is “irresponsible” “defies science and safety.”
“In my opinion, the CDC has lost all credibility and is in direct conflict with the FDA for marketing a non-FDA approved drug,” Marshall said. “A biological male filled with hormones and a concoction of other drugs that have not been studied that could harm a baby should NEVER be encouraged. When will the Woke Left wake up and realize what they are doing to our country?”
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
Christine Anderson, a member of the European Parliament and a member of Germany’s conservative Alternative for Germany (AfD) party says that freedom, Democracy, and the rule of law are on the brink of collapse in Western nations and the Covid-19 pandemic is partially to blame.
“We are now violating what we thought was the foundation our societies were built on,” Anderson said.
Anderson recently completed a tour in Canada visiting the Freedom Convoy and decided to take the opportunity to attend this year’s Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) which is known to host thousands of conservative supporters, activists, and lawmakers to draw attention to the threats currently facing Western democracy.
The Freedom Convoy is a series of ongoing protests and blockades in Canada against Covid-19 vaccine mandates and restrictions. The convoy was originally created to protest vaccine mandates for crossing the United States border but later evolved into a protest about oppressive Covid-19 restrictions in general.
The German politician noted that her concerns are focused on Western democracy, admitting she doesn’t expect governments in China, North Korea, or even Russia to value ideals like freedom and rule of law.
“I hold the Western democracies to a higher standard, but we are now violating what we thought was the foundation our societies were built on and a really scary thing is that all these Western democracies seem to be in lock-step right now with whatever agenda they are trying to implement and push,” she explained.
The right-leaning EU parliament member says it’s time for the people to hold countries accountable for their actions.
“What is Democracy all about?” Anderson questioned. “Democracy is all about the people telling the government what to do, not the other way around.”
Throughout the Covid-19 pandemic, Americans were forced to shutter businesses, close schools, and blindly agree to take newly released vaccinations. And if anyone dared speak against the latest narrative regarding vaccines or the virus? They could expect to be ridiculed, questioned, and ostracized by friends, family, co-workers, and even leaders in government.
“The whole narrative about ostracizing people was frustrating…the whole narrative of ‘my choice my body’ was gone. People were ridiculed and scapegoated,” the German politician reflected.
In 2021, President Joe Biden insulted Americans who had yet to receive “the jab” conveniently forgetting the fact he had cast doubt on the vaccines while Donald Trump was in the White House.
“If you’re not vaccinated, you’re not nearly as smart as I thought you were,” Biden said.
President Biden was an outspoken critic of former President Trump’s Operation Warp Speed program which is largely credited for helping create and distribute Covid-19 vaccines.
“The way [then-President Donald Trump] talks about the vaccine is not particularly rational,”
Biden said per the Western Journal. “He’s talking about it being ready, he’s going to talk about moving it quicker than the scientists think it should be moved. … People don’t believe that he’s telling the truth, therefore they’re not at all certain they’re going to take the vaccine.”
“And one more thing,” he said. “If and when the vaccine comes, it’s not likely to go through all the tests that needs to be and the trials that are needed to be done.”
However, while Covid-19 was able to highlight some government corruption Anderson says this dangerous assault on democracy has been happening for decades.
“We’ve seen a full-blown gaslighting of the people.” Anderson said. “Now, fundamental rights are being discussed as though they are privileges that the government grants or withholds depending on the citizen’s behavior.”
But all hope is not lost. The German politician was optimistic that more people have “woken up” over the past three years and are ready to push back.
“The so-called pandemic highlighted the left’s pressure campaign to redefine certain concepts,” Anderson reckoned. “It highlighted their ridiculousness and their willingness and determination to push back against people, disenfranchise them, and take away their rights.”
Anderson noted that her home country came dangerously close to repeating history by enacting legislation that would have forced unvaccinated citizens to pay for their own medical treatments or even be turned away for treatment altogether.
Germany’s public healthcare system ensures free healthcare for all.
“My country has been there historically,” Anderson warned. “This is exactly the stuff totalitarianism is made of. I had hoped that the Germans had learned their lesson, but I have to say they have not learned a damn thing.”
However, despite what some could call insurmountable odds Christine Anderson said she’s ready to take a stand against anti-democratic efforts whenever she sees it and refuses to let history repeat itself.
“I will always say what I believe to be true. When I see parallels between another totalitarian regime I will be there and I will point it out.”
Liberals aren’t happy about this…
The new movie “Sound of Freedom” is dominating the box office and Democrats are scratching their heads as to why…
Watch Amanda explain the situation below:
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
President Joe Biden’s troubled adult son Hunter Biden lied under oath to Congress, which is a prosecutable crime, congressional Republicans accuse in a new release of documents and evidence.
The U.S. House Ways and Means Committee “voted to release over 100 pages of newly obtained evidence, provided to the Committee by Internal Revenue Service (IRS) whistleblowers Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler, showing Hunter Biden was not truthful during his sworn testimony before Congress on February 28th, 2024,” Committee Republicans announced in a statement.
“In addition to the evidence showing Hunter Biden’s repeated lies under oath before Congress, the Ways and Means Committee voted to release additional documents that affirm the credibility of the IRS whistleblowers’ sworn testimony and evidence previously released by the Committee, as well as more evidence of the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) obstruction of the IRS investigation into Hunter Biden,” the statement reads.
“Hunter Biden has shown once again he believes there are two systems of justice in this country – one for his family, and one for everyone else. Not only did Hunter Biden refuse to comply with his initial subpoena until threatened with criminal contempt, but he then came before Congress and lied,” said Committee Chairman Jason Smith (R-MO.)
“The Ways and Means Committee’s investigation, and the documents released today, are not part of a personal vendetta against Hunter Biden, but are meant to ensure the equal application of the law,” Smith added.
Smith then noted if Biden lied under oath, he may be criminally prosecuted.
“Lying during sworn testimony is a felony offense that the Department of Justice has prosecuted numerous individuals for in recent years, and the American people expect the same accountability for the son of the President of the United States. Hunter Biden’s lies under oath, and obstruction of a congressional investigation into his family’s potential corruption, calls into question other pieces of his testimony. The newly released evidence affirms, once again, the only witnesses who can be trusted to tell the truth in this investigation are the IRS whistleblowers,” said Smith.
The Committee notes they are releasing:
Complete versions of communications between Hunter Biden and his business associates, thus showing that previously released IRS agent summaries were accurate. You can find the new material here.
Evidence of Assistant U.S. Attorney Leslie Wolf informing IRS investigators’ that they were unable to pursue Kevin Morris as a witness in the Hunter Biden investigation after receiving a classified briefing at CIA headquarters. The new evidence shows that despite requests from investigators to understand the reason why they were unable to pursue Kevin Morris as a witness, DOJ never provided investigators with the requested information.
In a statement, Committee Republicans laid out the alleged lies Biden told while testifying under oath, writing:
The new evidence indisputably shows Hunter Biden lied to Congress in at least three separate instances during his February 28, 2024 transcribed interview:
Lie # 1: “I sent the text to the wrong Zhao”
During his deposition, Committee investigators questioned Hunter Biden about the now infamous WhatsApp message he sent to a business associate at the Chinese energy company, CEFC, stating, “I’m sitting here with my father, and we would like to understand why the commitment has not been fulfilled.” In the months that followed, $5 million flowed from CEFC affiliates to companies connected to Hunter and James Biden, the President’s brother.
Hunter Biden’s Sworn Testimony: “The Zhao that this is sent to is not the Zhao that was connected to CEFC” and he “had no understanding or even remotely knew what the hell I was even Goddamn talking about.”
The Truth: According to phone records of Hunter Biden’s WhatsApp messages released by the Ways and Means Committee today, the President’s son communicated with only one “Zhao” – Raymond Zhao – in that exchange. Not only did the same Zhao respond, but his message indicates he knew exactly what Hunter Biden was talking about, and that Hunter Biden continued to communicate with the same “Zhao” phone number for an additional three months regarding matters related to CEFC.
Lie # 2: “Neither of these accounts were under [Hunter Biden’s] control nor affiliated with him”:
According to Hunter Biden’s business associate, Devon Archer, he and Hunter Biden were equal owners of Rosemont Seneca Bohai, and that entity was used by both individuals. According to evidence provided by the IRS whistleblowers, Hunter Biden was the beneficial owner of the entity’s associated bank account, which was used to receive Hunter’s salary from Burisma and to receive foreign wires, such as funds allegedly transferred from a Kazakhstani individual through an entity that were then used to purchase a Porsche for Hunter Biden. Congressional investigators questioned Hunter Biden during his February 28th deposition regarding his connection to Rosemont Seneca Bohai, as well as bank accounts associated with the entity.
Hunter Biden’s Sworn Testimony: Neither Rosemont Seneca Bohai, nor its associated bank accounts, were “under my control nor affiliated with me” and Hunter, “didn’t even know that there was such a thing” in reference to a corporate secretary of the entity.
The Truth: Evidence obtained by the Committee and released today from IRS investigator Joseph Ziegler shows otherwise. Not only is there documentation that Hunter Biden was the beneficial owner of a bank account in the name of Rosemont Seneca Bohai, but the Committee has obtained a signed document where Hunter Biden affirms, “I, Robert Hunter Biden, hereby certify that I am the duly elected, qualified and acting Secretary of Rosemont Seneca Bohai, LLC” in order to enter into a contract on behalf of the entity with Porsche Financial Services.
Lie # 3: “I’d never pick up the phone and call anybody for a visa”:
During his deposition, Committee investigators questioned Hunter Biden regarding what services he provided to Burisma during his tenure on the board of the Ukrainian company. One of the services that Burisma allegedly needed, was work related to obtaining a U.S. visa for the CEO of Burisma. Congressional investigators questioned Hunter Biden under oath regarding his work for Burisma, and his testimony reveals a potential attempt to conceal he was actively using his name and father’s influence to aid foreign nationals in obtaining visas from the U.S. government.
Hunter Bidens’ Sworn Testimony: Hunter Biden stated he was unwilling to provide “any work as it related to visas that they needed.” In fact, he stated unequivocally that he’d “never pick up the phone and call anybody for a visa.”
The Truth: The Committee has obtained and made public today an email communication between Devon Archer, Hunter Biden, and Ukrainian associates in which, in response to concerns about the revocation of Nikolay Zlochevsky’s, the CEO of Burisma, U.S. visa and the resulting limitations on his foreign travel, Archer stated, “Hunter is checking with Miguel Aleman to see if he can provide cover to Kola on the visa.” “Kola” being Nikolay Zlochevsky. Archer also tells Vadim Pozharskyi to “please send Hunter an email with all Kola’s passport and visa documents and evidence and copy me. We’ll take it from there.” These documents show that Hunter Biden did in fact do work on visa issues.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk. It is republished with permission from American Liberty News.
Barbie was released in cinemas worldwide on July 21. Since then, according to Warner Bros., the colorfully controversial, left-leaning, gender-bender, fantasy-comedy movie has drawn in $459m so far in the U.S. and $572m internationally.
That means it has already topped $1 billion overall. This is a huge global smash. But what does it say about us?
Oscar-nominated Barbie writer and director Greta Gerwig also became the first female filmmaker to surpass the billion-dollar benchmark as a solo director, Warner Bros. said.
Other female directors have helmed films that have surpassed the $1bn-mark, but they were working with others. Frozen, the animated blockbuster, and its sequel have generated more than $1.4bn in box office takings and were co-directed by Jennifer Lee and Chris Buck.
Meanwhile, Captain Marvel, starring Brie Larson and co-directed by Anna Boden and Ryan Fleck, generated more than $1.1bn at the box office.
But what is the very pink themed movie, starring Margot Robbie (the primary Barbie) and Ryan Gosling (the primary Ken), about? What is its messaging?
The feminist comedy with a PG-13 rating’s plot hinges on Barbie leaving her fake but perfectly idealized world behind and, like Pinocchio before her, becoming “real.”
That’s when it gets political and goes straight into lefty social issues like ‘the patriarchy,’ and gender confusion-fusion.
Elon Musk mocked the film on ‘X,’ formerly known as Twitter, saying: “If you take a shot every time Barbie says the word ‘Patriarchy,’ you will pass out before the movie ends.”
Conservatives have derided the Barbie movie’s anti-male themes, and inclusion of a trans-gender actor/actress playing one of the Barbies. The critics include journalist Piers Morgan and commentator Ben Shapiro. Newsweek reported:
“If I made a movie mocking women as useless dunderheads, constantly attacking ‘the matriarchy,’ and depicting all things feminist as toxic bulls***, I wouldn’t just be canceled, I’d be executed,” Morgan wrote in his columns for British newspaper The Sun and The New York Post after seeing the Barbie movie.
Shapiro meanwhile went as far as to burn a Barbie and Ken doll on Saturday, after seeing the movie the night before. The following Monday he claimed he had received death threats for his stunt.”
Writing for the New York Post, Morgan added: “the movie achieves exactly what it wanted to achieve and that is to establish the matriarchy as the perfect antidote to the patriarchy when in fact it’s just the same concept that they asked us all to detest in the first place.”
The movie “forgets its core audience of families and children while catering to nostalgic adults and pushing lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender character stories,” wrote a contributor to Movieguide, a site with a conservative Christian bent.
Ginger Gaetz, wife of conservative Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz, posted on ‘X’ that at the premiere, she saw “disappointingly low T from Ken,” referring to testosterone, and she also called him a “beta” male, not an alpha.
Less politically, Time said: “Barbie never lets us forget how clever it’s being, every exhausting minute.”
Mattel has a lot riding on its $100m Barbie movie, the first of a planned slew of films from the toy-making behemoth that include Masters of the Universe, Barney, Hot Wheels and Magic 8 Ball, to name but a few.
The Barbie doll was launched by Mattel in 1959, when the toy-maker itself was only 14 years old, and has sold over a billion units over six decades.
Today, Barbie is still considered Mattel’s crown jewel, driving about a third of its $5 billion annual revenue.
Since 2018, Mattel has been working on a strategy to license its intellectual properties to Hollywood, to reverse a sales decline over recent years. The new movie was a big gamble for Mattel Films.
A hit would boost toy sales, a flop would have done the opposite – threatening other projects currently in pre-production. But the gamble has clearly paid off.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
