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.
“Judge Judy” Sheindlin called Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s (D) hush money case against former President Trump “nonsense” in a recent interview.
“You gotta twist yourself into a pretzel to figure out what the crime was. [Bragg] doesn’t like him — New York City didn’t like him for a while,” Sheindlin said of Trump in a “Who’s Talking to Chris Wallace?” interview streaming Friday on Max.
“I would be happier, as someone who owns property in Manhattan, if the district attorney of New York County would take care of criminals who were making it impossible for citizens to walk in the streets and use the subway, to use his efforts to keep those people off the street, than to spend $5 million or $10 million of taxpayers’ money trying Donald Trump on this nonsense,” the longtime TV judge told Wallace.
Watch:
“I, as a taxpayer in this country, resent using the system for your own personal self-aggrandizement,” the “Judy Justice” personality said of Bragg.
Asked by the CNN anchor what she thought of Trump, the 81-year-old former Manhattan Family Court judge replied, “I think he was a good businessman, a real estate guy. And he was certainly terrific on ‘The Apprentice.’”
The celebrity judge’s comments come as the Manhattan DA seeks an extension of the restraining order against former President Donald Trump. (RELATED: Manhattan DA Seeks Extended Gag Order Against Trump Amid Death Threats To Bragg)
They argue that Trump’s public statements have increased tensions and led to threats against Bragg and his team before Trump’s July 11 sentencing.
The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office charged Trump with 34 counts of falsifying business records as part of a hush-money scheme to prevent porn star Stormy Daniels from speaking out about her alleged extramarital affair before the 2016 presidential election.
Before Trump, no sitting or former president ever faced criminal charges. This is the lowest level felony in New York, any potential sentence will more than likely be served after the 2024 election.
As The New York Times reports:
The order, issued before Mr. Trump’s Manhattan criminal trial began in mid-April, bars him from attacking witnesses, jurors, court staff and relatives of the judge who presided over the trial, Juan M. Merchan.
Mr. Trump’s lawyers have sought to have the order lifted since Mr. Trump’s conviction in late May. But in a 19-page filing on Friday, prosecutors argued that while Justice Merchan no longer needed to enforce the portion of the gag order relating to trial witnesses, he should keep in place the provisions protecting jurors, prosecutors, court staff and their families.
Article Published With The Permission of American Liberty News
They say actions speak louder than words…
Former President Trump is stepping up as Joe Biden continues to let Americans down. Less than three weeks ago, a train carrying hazardous chemicals derailed in East Palestine, Ohio in an event that could have a devastating impact on the environment and community.
Despite the ongoing chaos, the Biden administration has been slow to act…no surprise there.
Watch Amanda break down the situation below:
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
The walls are closing in on Donald Trump.
Will the former President have another indictment in the coming weeks over his alleged mishandling of classified documents after leaving the White House in 2021? It’s not looking good.
Former President Donald Trump on Wednesday said he has not been told that he’s being indicted as a special counsel investigation into his handling of classified documents shows signs of wrapping up.
“No one has told me I’m being indicted, and I shouldn’t be because I’ve done NOTHING wrong,” Trump wrote on Truth Social, adding that he has “assumed for years that I am a Target of the WEAPONIZED DOJ & FBI.”
Watch Amanda explain the situation below:
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – Trump lovers and haters are having quite the ride as Trump’s net worth seems to be on a rollercoaster.
The Wall Street debut of Trump Media & Technology Group (TMTG) – whose flagship product is the social media platform “Truth Social” – boosted Donald Trump’s stock on paper, but the value of his shares has since plummeted. (RELATED: Truth Social Co-Founders Sue Donald Trump)
Will Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign help boost his worth again?
As I recently wrote about, Trump’s net worth soared to at least $6.4 billion – up nearly $4 billion – last week after investors approved his social media company’s merger with Digital World. Tuesday, March 27, was its first day as an independently traded public company.
This briefly made the former president one of the 450 richest people in the world.
Even though Trump Media, which trades under the ticker DJT (Trump’s initials) is losing money and generating scant revenue, Wall Street had valued the company at as much as $11 billion based on the stock’s closing price Friday, according to Renaissance Capital.
By Monday afternoon that valuation tumbled to about $8.8 billion.
It closed at $48.66 per share, a 26.5% drop from its $66.22. The plunge came after Trump Media unveiled its 2023 results for the first time, revealing full-year revenues of $4.1 million on a net loss of $58.2 million.
Trump’s company has said it expects to continue losing money for a while, and at least one expert says it’s likely worth far less than the stock market suggests.
Trump, who owns 78.5 million shares in Trump Media, about 57% of all shares, saw his stake in the social media business fall in value by $1.4 billion. At Monday afternoon’s prices, that stake is now worth approximately about $3.8 billion. (RELATED: Wall Street Journal Rips Into Biden for Now-Infamous Tweet)
Trump’s nearly 79 million shares of Trump Media & Technology Group are now – by far – his largest asset, worth nearly twice as much as all his real estate, resort and cash holdings combined.
Meanwhile, CNN reported: “The problem for Trump Media is its main product — Truth Social — is shrinking.” It added “Monthly active US users on iOS and Android plunged in February to 494,000, down 51% year-over-year.”
“By comparison,” CNN noted, “X has 75 million monthly active US users. Even Threads has more than 10 times as many users as Truth Social.”
CNN continued:
While Trump Media made just $4.1 million in revenue in 2023, rival X (formerly known as Twitter) raked in more than 100 times that much — $665 million — in 2013, ahead of its initial public offering in November 2013. Twitter also generated just over $5 billion in revenue in the final year before it was taken private by Elon Musk.
In fact, Truth Social’s financials are comparable to that of The Messenger, the upstart digital news outlet that imploded earlier this year. Citing an investor deck, CNBC reported in January that The Messenger posted 2023 revenue of $3.8 million and a net loss of $43 million.
But this year may decide the future of Trump’s net worth, at least related to his media company. Matthew Kennedy, senior IPO strategist at Renaissance Capital said, according to CNN:
2024 is the make-or-break year for this company. For TMTG the thing that matters now is getting in front of the cash cannon that is the 2024 presidential election. And the company does have one notable advantage. Trump-backed super PACs have raised millions. Where do you think they’ll spend their digital ad buckets?
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
Matt Whitaker hosts prominent Trump adviser Kash Patel on Liberty & Justice.
Per Matt Whitaker:
Kash Patel is an American attorney, children’s book author and former government official. He served as chief of staff to the Acting United States Secretary of Defense under President Donald Trump.
Matthew G. Whitaker was acting Attorney General of the United States (2018-2019). Prior to becoming acting Attorney General, Mr. Whitaker served as Chief of Staff to the Attorney General. He was appointed as the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Iowa by President George W. Bush, serving from 2004-2009. Whitaker was the managing partner of Des Moines-based law firm, Whitaker Hagenow & Gustoff LLP from 2009 until rejoining DOJ in 2017. He was also the Executive Director for FACT, The Foundation for Accountability & Civic Trust, an ethics and accountability watchdog, between 2014 and 2017. Mr. Whitaker is the Author of the book–Above the Law, The Inside Story of How the Justice Department Tried to Subvert President Trump.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
His fans have had enough…
Watch Amanda explain the latest controversy below:
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – A spokesman for the Islamist terror group Islamic State, or ISIS, has announced that their latest leader has been killed “in action.”
His death has not yet been independently verified, and no one has claimed responsibility for the killing.
Asked in Washington about Abu al-Hassan al-Hashimi al-Qurayshi‘s death, National Security Council spokesman John Kirby told The Associated Press:
“We certainly welcome the news of the death of another ISIS leader. I don’t have any additional operational details to provide at this time.”
Qurashi refers to the tribe of Islam’s founder, the Prophet Muhammad, from whom ISIS leaders must claim descent.
If the latest leader’s death is true, he would be the second ISIS leader killed this year, about 10 months after the death of the previous leader killed in a U.S. raid in northwest Syria in March.
He would also be the third leader eliminated since the founder Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was killed by U.S. forces in Idlib, Syria in 2019.
Their deaths came after the meteoric rise of ISIS in 2013-2014 following Barack Obama’s reckless withdrawal from Iraq in December 2011.
Obama famously called ISIS the “JV team.”
Meanwhile, some doubt the veracity of the claim that the latest ISIS leader has been killed.
According to the Mirror, Hassan Hassan, co-author of the book “ISIS: Inside the Army of Terror,” urged caution about the news and says ISIS could have “easily” said “that person was killed and replaced with ‘Abu al-HussAIN al-Qurashi.’ Who could tell?”
The Mirror reported:
Writing on Twitter Mr Hassan continued: “Important to note that this is quite possibly a fake announcement.
“Scenario 1 is that the ISIS leader was killed ‘accidentally’ during a raid or fighting without him being known to whoever killed him (the US, Iraqis, Kurds) so those did not know they killed the leader. That’d be unprecedented, but possible.
“Also, jihadist groups have a long history of claiming leaders/commanders dead, just to get intelligence/security agencies off their back.”
ISIS has been mostly defeated in Iraq and Syria, under relentless attacks during Trump’s administration, but sleeper cells still carry out attacks on both countries
The ISIS threat has also been increasing recently, under Joe Biden, especially in Africa.
Abu al-Hassan al-Hashimi al-Qurayshi was reportedly replaced by Abu al-Hussain al-Hussaini al-Qurashi as the despicable terror group’s new caliph.
The Daily Mail reported:
The [ISIS] spokesman did not provide details on the new leader, but said he was a ‘veteran’ jihadist and called on all groups loyal to IS to pledge their allegiance.
Little else is known of the leader who is taking control of the beleaguered terror group whose influence over the Middle East has waned in recent years.
Apparently, being chosen the ISIS leader, or caliph, brings with it a very short life span.
Let’s see how long this new leader lasts before being sent to enjoy his 72 virgins.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – Tucker Carlson’s misguided attempt to use cherry-picked moments of the newly released video of Jan. 6 to argue that nothing bad happened at the Capitol that day, is horribly timed and very dumb.
As I wrote the day after I personally observed events at the Capitol that day, January 6 was neither a deadly coup, insurrection nor peaceful guided tours of the Capitol.
It was a mixture of some of those things, none of those things, and everything in between.
And Tucker would have been far more effective, and credible had he used the video to show that the Left’s Jan. 6 narrative was incomplete, distorted, and totally one-sided, rather than trying to say it was totally false.
Because the truth is that Jan 6 was like the story of the blind men and the elephant, each one grasping one part of the animal, like the leg, tail, or trunk, and describing the giant beast as something totally different.
On Jan. 6 what began as a massive peaceful rally of tens of thousands of pro-Trump protesters, soon degraded when smaller elements (a few hundred) of the much larger peaceful crowd broke off and did conduct a violent attack on parts of the Capitol.
Hundreds more just stupidly followed the initial ‘attack mob’ inside.
In the first group, some had military training, used stack formations, and were very organized and intent on forcefully breaching the building.
While none were found with, or used firearms, during the riot, there was violence with sticks, flagpoles, and pepper spray.
I called these violent rioters, thugs, and criminals.
They were similar to the violent BLM rioters who had violently attacked police at the White House in the summer of 2020 or besieged the Portland Federal Courthouse for months.
On Jan. 6 police officers were similarly attacked and beaten, and the Capitol was ultimately breached unlawfully.
Inside, one non-violent protester, Ashley Babbitt, an Air Force security forces veteran, was shot by a Capitol Police Officer. Likely, unjustly.
She was the only person killed during the riot.
All this occurred in the span of just a few hours.
But the Capitol complex is massive, and what was happening violently on one end was not being replicated at other parts of the Capitol.
As much of the Tucker video showed truthfully, in many places and entrances, Capitol Police had allowed protesters inside, in some cases escorted them around.
In other cases, the police simply stood by as the ‘tourist’ protesters milled around and took selfies or acted stupidly.
Still, ever since then, there has been a profound narrative battle pitting those fanatics on the right who said nothing at all happened and the fanatics on the left who claim Jan. 6 was worse than Pearl Harbor or 9/11, and an insurrection that risked the essence of American democracy.
Sadly, neither side is correct, but only the most extreme one-sided ‘insurrection’ narrative was put forward by the left and last Congress’ Democratic-run Jan. 6 committee, and repeated daily by the partisan, anti-Trump media.
The insurrection narrative was pushed by cherry-picked videos and photos of the same short-lived Capitol violence from different views and angles, repeated in a nearly constant loop for the most distorted and dramatic effect possible.
But now Tucker has done the same.
Capitol Police Chief Thomas Manger wrote in an internal message to officers that Carlson’s Monday night primetime program “conveniently cherry-picked from the calmer moments of our 41,000 hours of video” to incorrectly portray the violent assault as more akin to a peaceful protest. He added that Carlson’s “commentary fails to provide context about the chaos and violence that happened before or during these less tense moments.”
And many Republican leaders agreed.
The timing is also horrible.
As Politico reported:
“It’s definitely stupid to keep talking about this … So what is the purpose of continuing to bring it up unless you’re trying to feed Democrat narratives even further?” Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas) said in an interview, noting the videos didn’t show “anything we don’t already know.”
“I don’t really have a problem with making it all public. But if your message is then to try and convince people that nothing bad happened, then it’s just gonna make us look silly.”
So how should we view the events of the January 6 riot accurately and fairly?
Probably the best description was provided by Rep. Kelly Armstrong (R-N.D.) when he said he has “a hard time with all of it.”
He added that Jan. 6 “was not a peaceful protest. It was not an insurrection. It was a riot that should have never happened. And a lot of people share the blame for that. The truth is always messier than any narrative.”
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – The original interview Tucker Carlson did with former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund about the Capitol Riot never aired on Fox News because Tucker was fired just before. Still, a lot about that interview has leaked.
I wrote about some of Sund’s claims earlier in August.
In that piece, I note that the Jan 6 riot was not a false flag operation, and most of the rioters were confirmed Trump supporters. However, in many ways, it was allowed to happen.
But to put the entire thing on the record, Carlson did the interview again – and posted it to X, formerly known as Twitter. And it is damning to those Democrats who benefited from the Capitol Riot.
Much of what Sund has said coincides with or dovetails with facts I have written about previously, especially how the Sergeant at Arms for both the House under Democrat Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and the Senate under Democrat Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, both declined National Guard support until it was too late.
The same occurred with the Democrat Mayor of Washington, DC, Muriel Bowser who specifically stated that troops not be deployed unless the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) approved.
She added that she believed her police department was “well trained and prepared to lead the way” to ensure Jan. 6 unfolded safely. They weren’t. And they didn’t.
This despite President Donald Trump offering the National Guard to them more than once.
*(Note that the graphic above is incorrect in one detail – Officer Brian Sicknick was NOT killed defending the Capitol. He died later of natural causes (a stroke) unrelated to the riot.)
In the case of Pelosi, Carlson is direct: “So this is an event that Pelosi herself has likened to Pearl Harbor and 9/11 — you know, the worst thing that’s ever happened on American soil — and she’s in charge of allowing the National Guard to come in and respond but she doesn’t for 71 minutes? What is that?”
But Sund adds more details and perspective to the event that makes the lead up even more damning for the Democrats.
The Blaze reported:
In the interview, Sund indicated critical intelligence pertaining to possible threats ahead of the Jan. 6 protest was withheld from the Capitol Police and that the absence of such intelligence was cited by the congressional sergeants at arms — who were reporting to then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell at the time — as cause not to reinforce the Capitol in advance with the National Guard and federal assets.
However, the outlet added the former Chief now understands that the intelligence was there. It just wasn’t provided to his department:
According to the former chief, “We now know FBI [and] DHS was swimming in that intelligence. We also know now that the military seemed to have some very concerning intelligence as well,” adding that the FBI field office in Washington and other outfits “didn’t put out a single official document specific to January 6. That’s very unusual.”
During a conference call on Jan. 5, 2021, with the leaders of the Metropolitan Police Department and the FBI Washington field office along with National Guard, military officials, and others, “not one person on that call talked about any concerns from the intelligence … that was out there.”
“This was handled differently. … It’s almost like they wanted it to be watered down, the intelligence to be watered down for some reason,” said Sund. “It wasn’t right the way the intelligence was handled and the way we were set up on the Hill.”
The question is – did these federal security agencies make the decisions not to forward this intelligence on their own, or where they told not to send it?
In the interview, Sund noted that then-acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Mark Milley had “both discussed locking down the city of Washington, D.C., because they were so worried about violence at the Capitol on Jan. 6.”
Sund added: “On Sunday and Monday, they had been discussing locking down the city, revoking permits on Capitol hill because of the concern for violence.”
He continued: “You know who issues the permits on Capitol Hill for demonstrations? I do. You know who wasn’t told? Me.”
This deserves much more investigation. The Jan 6 Committee was a partisan circus and designed only to blame Trump.
I have argued that the Pentagon leadership was extremely wary of bringing in the National Guard or any federal assets to DC due to the extreme overreaction by Democrats over Trump sending federal officers to quell riots in Portland a few months earlier.
Democrats also were apoplectic with rage at Trump’s actions to stop violent rioters outside the White House on June 1st.
There was also the incessant talk in the media about Trump using the military for a ‘coup,’ which Miller has stated as a constraint several times. These all remain valid explanations for the Pentagon’s preferred inaction.
And maybe for the Mayor’s decision to initially reject Guard troops.
But what about Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer? What did they know and when did they know it? And why did they veto reinforcing the Capitol till the chaos had already begun?
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
