Opinion

Home Opinion

Amanda Head: Even Hollywood Hates Meghan Markle Now

0
WELLINGTON, NEW ZEALAND - October 28: THE DUKE AND DUCHESS OF SUSSEX'S VISIT TO NEW ZEALAND: Engagement 6. Reception hosted by the Governor-General, Government House. October 28, 2018 in Wellington, New Zealand. (Photo by Mark Tantrum/ http://marktantrum.com)

Even woke Hollywood can’t stand Meghan Markle…

The former princess’ podcast finally got the axe…

Watch Amanda explain the situation below:

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.

Biden Trades Russian Arms Dealer for Woke Female Basketball Player – Leaves Male US Marine to Rot

10

ANALYSIS – Can’t say this was unexpected. Joe Biden just traded a convicted Russian arms dealer for a guilty woke basketball player, while leaving an innocent former U.S. Marine to rot in Russian jail. 

And to make matters worse, Brittney Griner, who pled guilty to having cannabis vape oil in her luggage, was only in Russian jail for a few months while Paul Whelan, who was set-up and falsely convicted of espionage, has been imprisoned in a Russian labor camp for nearly four years.

Whelan, 52, remains there where he is to continue serving out a 16-year sentence.

Russian arms trafficker Viktor Bout had been serving time in a U.S. federal prison since 2011. 

It is clear Biden is playing favorites.

Biden called Griner’s wife earlier this year to assure her of his commitment to securing her release. But no similar call was made to the Whelan family, despite multiple requests from Elizabeth Whelan for a meeting with the president. 

After news reports about the snub emerged, Biden finally called Elizabeth Whelan in early July.  

Of course, from day one, the liberal media has been constantly bombarding us with Griner’s sob story in her Russian jail, keeping her issue front and center for maximum PR leverage, while leaving Whelan on the back burner, if at all.

While we read every minor detail of Griner’s travails, and she was allowed regular access to the outside world, Whelan was held in a cell at the notorious Stalin-era Lefortovo Prison for over a year, where initially he was denied things like toilet paper and soap, and guards threatened, abused and harassed him.

Whelan also wasn’t allowed to make calls to his parents, his mail was censored, and visits from his lawyers and embassy representatives were extremely limited.

Recall that Griner, who is a black lesbian, also refused to stand for the national anthem.

To the left she checks all the super woke boxes.

Meanwhile, Biden blamed Russia for his failure to include Whelan in the trade.

“We’ve not forgotten about Paul Whelan,” Biden said Thursday morning. “This was not a choice about which American to bring home. … Sadly, for totally illegitimate reasons, Russia is treating Paul’s case differently than Brittney’s. … We will never give up.”

Well, that’s patently false. 

It doesn’t matter what the Russians say or want. It’s Biden’s job to make things happen. It should have been both released for Bout, or no deal. 

Especially when one who is young and healthy, and had been arrested for drugs, had only been in jail for a few months, and the other one who was falsely accused, is over 50 and been in a labor camp for 4 years.

However, being gracious, and perhaps in a bid to not alienate Biden, Whelan’s twin brother David Whelan, said Thursday:

I am so glad that Brittney Griner is on her way home. As the family member of a Russian hostage, I can literally only imagine the joy she will have, being reunited with her loved ones, and in time for the holidays. There is no greater success than for a wrongful detainee to be freed and for them to go home. The Biden administration made the right decision to bring Ms. Griner home, and to make the deal that was possible, rather than waiting for one that wasn’t going to happen.

But as the Detroit Free Press reports, this wasn’t the message the Whelan’s were sending a few months ago when the U.S. negotiated the release of Trevor Reed, another American wrongfully detained in Russia, in exchange for Russian drug trafficker Konstantin Yaroshenko

At the time, Whelan’s brother David asked: “Is President (Joe) Biden’s failure to bring Paul home an admission that some cases are too hard to solve? Is the administration’s piecemeal approach picking low-hanging fruit? And how does a family know that their loved one’s case is too difficult, a hostage too far out of reach?”

That last message is the more correct one. Biden clearly favored Griner to please his leftist base, while abandoning Whelan, a former U.S. Marine, to rot in A Russian jail. GAND

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

Biden DHS Funding Groups that Label Conservatives as Extremists

7
Joe Biden via Gage Skidmore Flickr

ANALYSIS – Your tax dollars are being used to demonize and target you. Team Biden continues its hyper-politicized, and illegal, campaign to equate Republicans and conservatives (i.e.: half the country) with Nazis and other fringe extremists.

And it is using the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to spearhead the effort.

Yes – They are weaponizing federal law enforcement to be used against you. And they are shamelessly lying about it.

Joe Biden’s DHS, led by Alejandro Mayorkas, gave more than $350,000 to a left-wing university program that put the Republican Party and mainstream conservative groups on a “pyramid of far-right radicalization” next to militant neo-Nazis.

This, according to documents obtained by a conservative media watchdog, Media Research Center (MRC).

Despite its denials, and attempts to cover its tracks, DHS used its Targeted Violence and Terrorism Prevention Grant Program to give the University of Dayton the funds in September 2022.

This followed the college’s grant request proposal which highlighted those outrageous links made at a seminar in November 2021.

At that event, Michael Loadenthal, a left-wing activist ‘researcher’ from the University of Cincinnati, presented the “Pyramid” — which also placed Breitbart News, PragerU, Turning Point USA, the Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN), and the American Conservative Union (ACU) on the next level of the ‘extremist’ pyramid.

The ACU hosts the annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) with speakers such as Donald Trump and other prominent Republicans.

And to Team Biden, CPAC, the GOP, and MAGA are all equal to Nazis.

Loadenthal, in another seminar, encouraged “antifascists” (aka radical left-wing extremists) to break the law and apply “pressure” to financial institutions and companies to de-platform conservatives.

DHS knew very well what it was funding at the University of Dayton, yet blatantly lied about it, with a spokesperson for the agency telling the New York Post: 

“This seminar was not funded, organized, or hosted by the Department of Homeland Security.”

Adding:

Similarly, the presented chart was not developed, presented, or endorsed by the Department of Homeland Security, and was not part of any successful grant application to the Department of Homeland Security. DHS does not profile, target, or discriminate against any individual for exercising their constitutional rights protected by the First Amendment.

But according to the evidence, that is simply untrue; DHS is doing exactly that.

“DHS is lying through its teeth once again,” Dan Schneider, a vice president at MRC, said in a statement. It “did indeed fund the…program a year after a graph and documents were presented that equated Nazis to conservatives, Christians, and Republicans.”

According to MRC, the University of Dayton’s PREVENTS-OH was “among the most radical grantees.” The program vowed to fight “domestic violence extremism and hate movements.”

But this grant is only a drop in the bucket of taxpayer funds used to target you.

The Blaze reports:

The DHS awarded 80 grants totaling nearly $40 million under its Targeted Violence and Terrorism Prevention Grant Program to establish “media literacy and online critical thinking initiatives.” 

In an internal memo obtained by MRC, DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas referred to the grant program as a “high priority.”

Of course, they are high priority – Team Biden and the Democrats need to smear and attack all Republicans ASAP – 2024 is just around the corner.

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

Trump Dominates GOP Presidential Rivals as Biden Approval Tanking

4
Donald Trump via Gage Skidmore Flickr

ANALYSIS – Even as the indictments pile up, or maybe because of them, a new national NBC News poll finds former President Donald Trump expanding his national lead in the Republican presidential nominating contest to 43 points over his nearest rival, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis.

Trump leads the first-choice field with 59% of national Republican primary voters. In comparison, Ron DeSantis gets support from 16% — followed by former United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley at 7% and former Vice President Mike Pence at 4%.

The poll also includes an all-time high disapproval of Joe Biden’s job performance. Fewer than 4 in 10 voters (37%) approve of his handling of the economy. This is huge.

As NBC News reported

Deeper inside those numbers, Biden is underwater among voters between the ages of 18 and 34 (46% of them approve of his job performance), all women (46%), Latinos (43%) and independents (36%).

What’s more, the NBC News poll finds 37% of voters approve of Biden’s handling of the economy, and 41% approve of his handling of foreign policy.

Biden is also taking a big hit for his open borders policy and unprecedented waves of illegal immigration on his watch, as also shown by a recent The Washington Post-ABC News poll. 

Axios noted

“A variety of factors may be at play,” [ABC News’ Gary] Langer writes in his analysis. “Biden’s poor performance ratings, the extent of economic discontent, the immigration crisis and doubts about his age clearly are relevant.”

Axios added: “In the Post-ABC poll, 44% said they’re worse off — the most for any president in the poll since… 1986, ABC News’ Gary Langer said in his poll analysis.”

“In NBC, Biden’s disapproval rating is the highest of his term for that poll.”

NBC News also noted that: “Another 60% have major concerns (45%) or moderate concerns (15%) about Biden’s possible awareness or involvement in the business dealings of his son, Hunter, including alleged financial wrongdoing and corruption.”

“This [NBC] survey is a startling flashing red light for an incumbent party,” said Republican pollster Bill McInturff of Public Opinion Strategies. McInturff conducted the September 15-19 poll with Democratic pollster Jeff Horwitt and his team at Hart Research Associates.

“Yes, the numbers for Biden aren’t where he needs them to be,” said Horwitt. However, Trump and Republicans have challenges, such as the GOP front-runner’s unpopularity with the general electorate.

Most polls show that both Trump and Biden have high unfavorability going into a general election.

NBC News reported: “Three-quarters of voters say they’re concerned about President Joe Biden’s age and mental fitness, while nearly two-thirds have concerns about the multiple trials former President Donald Trump faces, a new national NBC News poll finds, casting a gloomy shadow over the upcoming 2024 presidential election.”

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

Time Magazine Denies Nazi-Era Echo In Trump Cover Image

4
Donald Trump via Gage Skidmore Flickr

Photographer’s nod to controversial 1963 portrait fuels speculation.

WASHINGTON — Time magazine is facing backlash over its latest cover photo of President Donald Trump, after online critics and media outlets pointed out a visual similarity to a portrait the magazine used 60 years ago featuring convicted Nazi industrialist Alfried Krupp.

The image, shot by photographer Stephen Voss, shows Trump looming over the Resolute Desk in the Oval Office, dramatically lit from below. According to a report by The Daily Beast, the composition bears a striking resemblance to a 1963 photo of Krupp taken by the Jewish photographer Arnold Newman — a photograph widely studied for its chilling and deliberate framing of a man convicted of facilitating some of history’s most heinous crimes.

The Historical Background

Alfried Krupp von Bohlen und Halbach inherited control of the Krupp industrial empire from his father, Gustav Krupp, who had supported Adolf Hitler and helped finance the Nazis’ rise to power. Under Alfried’s leadership during World War II, Krupp factories supplied the Third Reich with armaments and heavy machinery vital to its war efforts, including tanks, submarines, and artillery.

National Museum of the U.S. Navy, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

After Germany’s defeat, Krupp was tried by the U.S. Military Tribunal in the Nuremberg Krupp Trial (officially The United States of America vs. Alfried Krupp, et al.), which took place from 1947 to 1948.

He was convicted primarily for:

  • Exploitation of Forced Labor: Krupp industries used 100,000 slave laborers and prisoners of war under brutal conditions. Many of these laborers were taken from occupied countries and concentration camps, forced to work long hours in unsafe factories.
Bundesarchiv, Bild 101I-138-1083-20 / Kessler, Rudolf / CC-BY-SA 3.0, CC BY-SA 3.0 DE , via Wikimedia Commons
  • Plundering Occupied Territories: Krupp was found guilty of seizing industrial plants and raw materials from conquered nations to boost Nazi Germany’s armament production.
Bundesarchiv, Bild 183-2005-1017-521 / Gehrmann, Friedrich / CC-BY-SA 3.0, CC BY-SA 3.0 DE , via Wikimedia Commons
  • Participation in Crimes Against Humanity: The tribunal held that Krupp’s active role in maintaining and expanding his war production empire made him complicit in Nazi crimes.
Bundesarchiv, Bild 146-1985-100-33 / Unknown authorUnknown author / CC-BY-SA 3.0, CC BY-SA 3.0 DE , via Wikimedia Commons

He was sentenced to 12 years in prison and had his property confiscated.

Newman’s portrait of Krupp is iconic in photographic circles. In the image, Krupp is seated at a desk under harsh lighting, his posture and setting portraying him as both powerful and ominous, reminiscent of a devil or a fiendish creature. Critics argue that Time’s Trump cover bears such a resemblance to Newman’s portrait that it cannot be a coincidence.

Photographer Reacts on Social Media

Voss, the photographer behind the Trump image, has not publicly commented on the comparison. However, he reportedly “liked” social media posts highlighting the resemblance — a move many interpret as a subtle acknowledgment of influence.

A spokesperson for Time magazine rejected the claims outright, telling The Daily Beast that “any suggestion of an intentional reference is completely untrue.”

Why This Matters

The controversy cuts across political and cultural lines:

  • Visual symbolism: Referencing imagery linked to Nazi figures — even inadvertently — risks crossing ethical and historical boundaries.
  • Editorial credibility: Time, known for its iconic covers, faces questions about whether such visual choices are neutral, intentional, or ideologically driven.
  • Trump’s image control: As a media-savvy political figure, Trump is acutely aware of how visuals shape perception. Whether intentional or not, the cover’s tone could affect public interpretation.

What’s Still Unknown

  • Was the similarity intentional? No direct evidence confirms that Voss or Time deliberately modeled the image after Newman’s Krupp portrait.
  • Does intent matter? Critics argue that even unintentional parallels can carry meaning, especially given the historical weight of the reference.
  • Will this have a lasting impact? It’s unclear, though likely, that the controversy will become another political flashpoint in media criticism.

A Larger Media Question

This episode adds fuel to a long-running debate over how the media portrays political leaders — especially those it opposes editorially. It also highlights the power images have in shaping public perception.

In an era when symbolism is parsed as carefully as language, even a magazine cover can carry profound consequences.

Trump Plans to Dramatically Reverse Biden’s Open Border Lunacy

0
Trump at the border wall via Wikimedia Commons

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Trump’s plan includes:

Screening out Marxists as well as Communists – check.

Screening out potential terrorists from extremist countries – check.

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

Quickly deporting criminal migrants – check.

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

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

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

According to Reason:

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

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

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

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

Bolt the hatches and bomb away.

Amanda Head: Liberal Supreme Court Justice Is Obsessed With Race

2
Duncan Lock, Dflock, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

The U.S. Supreme Court is in a sorry state of affairs.

One liberal-leaning justice just can’t seem to shake this obsession with race… and the implications are dangerous for the country.

Watch Amanda break down the problem below:

Pro-Lifers Bash Trump ‘Terrible’ Abortion Comments – But Was He Wrong?

1
Washington D.C., USA - January 22, 2015; A Pro-Life woman clashes with a group of Pro-Choice demonstrators at the U.S. Supreme Court.

ANALYSIS – During his recent NBC interview, former president Donald Trump called Florida’s recently passed six-week abortion ban “terrible.” The ban was signed into law by his 2024 Republican campaign rival Florida governor Ron DeSantis.

Trump believes that picking six weeks as the line to draw for abortion banning is not politically viable nationally. He argued that both liberals and conservatives should agree on a compromise solution — a compromise number of weeks.

And to clarify, Trump said the six-week ban was: “terrible. A terrible mistake.”

He was saying that, politically, passing a six-week ban was a mistake, because it charges up the pro-abortion activists, and alienates moderate women needed to win nationally.

Like it or not, exit polls in 2022 showed that the rush to ban abortions outright by some states just after Roe vs Wade was reversed, scared away a lot of independents and moderate suburban women, contributing to the extremely weak results for Republicans in the last midterm elections.

Trump, the ever-ready wheeler dealer, also predicted that: “both sides are going to like me,” adding, “What’s going to happen is you’re going to come up with a number of weeks or months, you’re going to come up with a number that’s going to make people happy.”

Here I think Trump made a terrible choice of words. You don’t want the left to like you, even if you are trying to disarm them. But that’s the way he thinks and speaks.

The former president also said that he would be “a mediator” between both sides to come up with a policy that is “good for everybody.”

I take that to mean a compromise timeline on the number of weeks for banning abortion nationwide, and what exceptions to make.

Some pro-lifers immediately bashed Trump for his comments. The Christian Post reported on the backlash:

Trump’s criticism of Florida’s law that bans abortion once a heartbeat can be detected, usually around six weeks of gestation, did not sit well with pro-life activists

Lila Rose, the founder and president of the pro-life group Live Action, took to X to describe the former president’s remarks as “pathetic and unacceptable.”

“Trump is actively attacking the very pro-life laws made possible by Roe’s overturning,” Rose wrote. “Heartbeat Laws have saved thousands of babies. But Trump wants to compromise on babies’ lives so pro-abort Dems ‘like him.'” 

And then there was conservative culture warrior Matthew Walsh, with whom I usually agree, who called Trump’s remarks as “an awful answer from a moral perspective” and “also stupid politically.” 

In his post on X (formerly Twitter) Walsh said that “there is no compromise on abortion that everyone will like.”

“It’s delusional to think otherwise. And contrary to Trump’s claims, almost all Democrats are indeed extreme on this issue,” he added. “You will be hard pressed to find more than maybe two or three on the national stage who don’t want abortion until birth or beyond. You can’t win over Democrats by going squishy on this issue. Republicans have tried that brilliant strategy for decades and accomplished exactly nothing by it.” 

But is Trump wrong? 

A six-week ban based on a fetal heartbeat sounds very reasonable to me. And is fine for Florida.

But I know that won’t wash with many other folks across the country who aren’t extreme but prefer another timeline for banning abortion. GOP presidential candidate Nikki Haley, who is staunchly pro-life, doesn’t believe a 15-week national ban is realistic either.

As governor of South Carolina, Haley signed a 20-week ban, joining 12 other states back then with bans.

Polls have shown that many, if not most, Democrats believe in some restrictions on abortion. Most, if not all Republicans will make exceptions for rape, incest, and health of the mother. Many would be happy with any reasonable ban, whether six, eight or ten weeks.

And Trump isn’t the only one who argues that taking a strident no compromise stance on abortion will hurt Republicans nationally. As the Christian Science Monitor reported:

At a closed-door conference meeting in the Capitol earlier this month, a super PAC aligned with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell gave Senate Republicans a briefing that seemed intended to serve as a wake-up call. The Dobbs decision has “recharged the abortion debate and shifted more people (including some Republicans) into the anti-Dobbs ‘pro-choice’ camp,” the political action committee’s report stated. Some senators reportedly left the meeting brainstorming potential new labels, such as “pro-baby,” that could replace the increasingly fraught “pro-life.”

Unlike in the past, when conservative candidates could simply identify themselves as “pro-life” without having to be specific, they are now being peppered with questions about real policy choices: Should abortion be banned at the state or federal level? After how many weeks? With or without exceptions? What about abortion pill restrictions?

At one end of the 2024 spectrum are Vice President Mike Pence and South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott, who have strongly leaned into an anti-abortion message. Both candidates have endorsed a national 15-week abortion ban.

By contrast, Mr. Trump, in his “Meet the Press” interview, declined to explicitly endorse a 15-week ban, drawing a rare rebuke this week from Senator Scott. Ms. Haley has outright dismissed a national 15-week ban as unrealistic – one of the “hard truths” that she has been delivering to voters across New Hampshire and Iowa. She says the Supreme Court was “right” to send abortion back to the states.

While I understand and appreciate the 100% pro-life stance, I also want to win the White House and Senate, and expand our lead in the House, so conservatives can keep pushing on this and other issues important to us.

So, Trump may not be wrong. We need to be more tactically flexible to win the bigger war.

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

GOP Bill Says Only US Flags Will Fly Over Our Embassies Abroad – But What About Fed Buildings at Home?

2

ANALYSIS – As a former Marine Corps officer and military attaché who served at several embassies overseas in the 1990s, it has infuriated me to see partisans and ideologues impose their radical agendas on our foreign embassies during Joe Biden’s tenure at the White House.

Flying extremely divisive, and to many host countries, offensive, flags representing controversial sexual agendas (LGBTQ+), which includes the extreme ‘trans’ movement, and private groups which espouse hate toward one race and law enforcement (Black Lives Matter – BLM), has been an egregious abuse pushed hard by the Biden State Department since last year.

Our embassies and consulates are official extensions of the United States. They are even considered sovereign U.S. territory. 

They are there on behalf of the entire U.S. nation, as represented by our national flag, not sectarian views, or radical and controversial agendas. 

This is true, even when these same radical agendas are being forced on our executive branches of government. 

Thankfully, the new GOP House is proposing to quickly change that abuse.

The Old Glory Only Act, introduced Monday by South Carolina Republican Rep. Jeff Duncan would prohibit any flag other than the American flag to be flown over U.S. embassies and consulates.

Newsmax reported:

“Our beautiful flag, Old Glory, should be the only flag flying and representing our country over our diplomatic and consular posts worldwide,” Duncan said in a press release announcing the bill’s introduction in the House Monday. “The American flag is a beacon of liberty, and no other flag or symbol better portrays our shared values than the Stars and Stripes. It is important to ensure that Old Glory only is flown at American embassies to represent our ideals abroad.”

The New York Times previously reported that Biden Secretary of State Antony Blinken authorized U.S. embassies to fly ‘gay pride’ flags in April 2021, prior to May 17, which is the International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia, and to continue displaying the flag through the end of the month.

The push to fly the rainbow ‘gay pride’ flag actually began in 2014, under the Obama-Biden term. That flag has flown over U.S. embassies in more than a dozen countries since then, including Russia, Spain, Sweden and South Korea.

President Trump’s Secretary of State banned the ‘pride’ flags from being flown but his order was quickly  reversed by Blinken.

In May, another cable from Blinken’s State Department authorized flying Black Lives Matter flags at U.S. diplomatic facilities worldwide, Foreign Policy reported at the time.

The BLM flag has been flown at U.S. embassies in Brazil, Greece, Spain, Bosnia, Cambodia and South Korea, according to Duncan’s office.

This, even though violent BLM rioters had spent months attacking the federal courthouse in Portland and laying siege to dozens of cities nationwide just months earlier in 2020.

The BLM riots caused over $2 billion in property damage, more than any other similar event in U.S. history, injured over 2,000 local and federal police officers, and resulted in numerous deaths of civilians. 

According to the NYT, a cable from the State Department at the time gave the chiefs of missions (COMs), who lead our overseas diplomatic stations, a “blanket written authorization” to display the flags if it was “appropriate in light of local conditions.” 

While the Times noted this was an “authorization, not a requirement,” few COMs will ignore the pressure to follow the boss’ lead, and the more woke embassies and consulates quickly started flying these unofficial flags.

Republicans are optimistic the new GOP leadership will hold a vote on the bill since there is broad GOP support for the idea.

But why stop there? Why not ban these divisive flags from being flown over any federal buildings, period – including all of the ones here at home?

According to the General Services Administration (GSA), More than 40 federal buildings across the country opted to raise the Pride Flag to show their support of “diversity, equity, and inclusion” in the federal workforce.

What they are actually doing is flying the flags of exclusive, divisive and radical private groups on federal property paid for by the U.S. taxpayer.

This too must end. 

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