Opinion

Home Opinion

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.

False AP Report About Russian Missiles Hitting Poland Could’ve Triggered WWIII

0
Main Directorate of the State Emergency Service of Ukraine in Kyiv, CC BY 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

ANALYSIS – Last week the world was hit by the purported news of a Russian missile strike into NATO member country, Poland. 

And now the award-winning AP reporter who wrote it has been fired.

Based only on a single, unnamed ‘senior U.S. intelligence official,’ the initial Associated Press (AP) story by James LaPorta, a former U.S. Marine who served in Afghanistan, was widely disseminated and quickly caused a barrage of other reporting.

Most of it was alarmist and panic-causing, with many in the news media and blogosphere quickly demanding harsh action against Russia.

As the Blaze reports:

Fox News and the Daily Mail similarly carried the AP reporter’s suggestion, the former running a piece entitled, “Russian missiles cross into NATO member Poland, kill 2: senior US intelligence official,” and the latter stating, “‘Russian bombs’ kill two in POLAND.”

CBS Evening News tweeted “RUSSIAN MISSILE STRIKE: Two Russian missiles crossed over the Ukrainian border into Poland, a NATO country, killing two civilians.”

A Russian attack on Poland could have triggered articles 4 and 5 of the NATO charter, potentially putting the U.S. into direct conflict with nuclear power.

Article 4 requires full consultation at the North Atlantic Council, the alliance’s political decision-making body, while Article 5 requires joint NATO action to repel an attack.

As MSN explains: “Article 5 states that the parties to the NATO treaty ‘agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all.’”

Article 5 also states that each NATO member must take “such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.”

This of course would make the U.S. a direct combatant in this war and could escalate to a nuclear exchange.

As such, I wrote about the ‘errant’ strike the same day, albeit in more careful ways.

My headline was more matter-of-fact and far less alarming, and it didn’t mention a direct Russian missile strike: “Escalation in Russia-Ukraine War Leads to Emergency Crisis Meeting.”

In the piece I did note the ramifications of any foreign missiles crashing into Poland, writing: “In what might be the greatest (albeit perhaps accidental) escalation since Russia invaded Ukraine, the war just crossed the border into a NATO country.”

And, yes, I like to say ‘albeit.’

added:

According to a senior U.S. intelligence official, as Russia pounded Ukraine’s energy facilities Tuesday with the largest barrage of missile strikes to date, some reportedly ‘stray’ Russian missiles crossed into NATO member Poland and struck a site in Poland about 15 miles from the Ukrainian border.

The allegedly errant strike killed two persons in the Polish village of Przewodów and provoked an emergency crisis meeting of Poland’s national security team, which will be held Tuesday evening.

While I did refer to a Ukrainian Air Force spokesman who said Russia used X-101 and X-555 cruise missiles in the latest attacks against Ukraine, and reports that expressed the belief that “one or more of these cruise missiles were the ones that struck Poland,” I was very careful in how I reported all this.

Note the extensive use of the words “accidental,” “allegedly,” “reportedly,” “errant,” and “stray” missiles in my report. I also explained that the incident had provoked an “emergency crisis meeting” in Poland.

The rest of my piece focused on the confirmed, massive Russian barrage of missile strikes against Ukrainian energy and infrastructure targets throughout the country.

In the end it appears that the missile that struck Poland was a Russian-made Ukrainian air defense missile that missed its mark and fell back to earth rather than self-destructs.

And even after its country of manufacture was known, outlets like CNN kept calling it a ‘Russian-made missile’ without adding that Ukraine uses lots of Russian-made missiles.

Of course, in my view, Russia is still to blame for this, albeit indirectly, since no one would be firing armed missiles near a NATO country if it weren’t for the unprovoked Russian invasion, and its reckless and dangerous strikes near NATO’s borders.

The Blaze added that:

After having updated the initial report several times, the AP indicated [November 16] that a new assessment from three U.S. officials “contradicts information” in the original article. Shortly thereafter, the article was reportedly taken offline.

The AP issued a retraction later that day…

On Nov. 21, LaPorta was fired.

But let’s use this incident as a teachable moment. 

Lesson one – as sophisticated news consumers, be circumspect with the news you read until it is fully verified.

Lesson two – be wary of reports using only one or two anonymous sources.

And lesson three – journalists, and social media posters, should use words like ‘reportedly’ a lot more, and make it clear that there is room for doubt or questions when the reports are still fresh and early.

The most important rule I’ve learned in journalism, and in intelligence, and also during my stint on Wall Street, is that – it’s never as good (or as bad) as first reported. 

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

Amanda Head: Lauren Boebert Election Update!

2

Pro-Trump superstar Congresswoman Lauren Boebert (CO-3rd) has faced a contentious post-Election Day battle as she fights for another term in Congress.

Watch Amanda explain the ongoing ballot fiasco below.

Trump Tax Return Leaker Asked To Appear Before Congress After Outrageous Sentence

2
Donald Trump via Gage Skidmore Flickr

The former IRS contractor who got a sweetheart plea agreement from the Biden administration after stealing and leaking the private tax information of President Donald Trump, will soon have to answer to Congress.

The House Judiciary Committee reports Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) sent a letter “requesting that Charles E. Littlejohn, a former Internal Revenue Service (IRS) contractor who leaked tax information belonging to hundreds of thousands of Americans, including President Donald Trump and Elon Musk, appear before the Committee.”

“In February, the IRS informed the Committee that Littlejohn had leaked the private data of more than 400,000 taxpayers—nearly six times higher than the 70,000 figure initially reported by the Biden-Harris IRS,” the Committee reports, noting it “raised concerns related to the Department of Justice’s sweetheart plea deal Littlejohn received, which resulted in a light sentence despite the severity of the data breach.”

Despite pulling off what may be the greatest data theft in IRS history, which the presiding judge called “a threat to our democracy,” and exhibiting little remorse, Biden administration prosecutors allowed Littlejohn to plead guilty to only one minor charge, giving him the lightest possible sentence.

Jordan’s letter reads, in part:

“Since the 118th Congress, the Committee has been conducting oversight into the unprecedented leak of protected taxpayer information by your client, Charles E. Littlejohn. On January 29, 2024, the Department of Justice (DOJ) allowed Mr. Littlejohn, a former Internal Revenue Service (IRS) contractor, to plead guilty to only one count of unauthorized disclosure of tax information for leaking ‘thousands of individuals’ and entities’ tax returns,’ including President Trump’s tax information. Since then, the Committee has obtained information showing that the scope of the leak is much broader than the Biden-Harris Administration led the public to believe—affecting over 400,000 taxpayers. In light of this new information, Mr. Littlejohn’s testimony is critical to the Committee’s oversight efforts and advancement of potential legislative reforms. We therefore respectfully request his testimony. 

“In 2017, Mr. Littlejohn applied to work as an IRS contractor with the expressed intention of accessing and disclosing President Trump’s tax returns. Not only did Mr. Littlejohn succeed in obtaining and leaking President Trump’s returns, he also disclosed ‘thousands of Americans’ federal tax returns and other private financial information’ to the New York Times and ProPublica, which together published more than 50 articles relying on the stolen information. Despite the Biden-Garland Justice Department referring to his unauthorized disclosures as ‘unparalleled in the IRS’s history,’ it only charged Mr. Littlejohn with one count of unauthorized disclosure of tax information, which resulted in a five-year prison sentence, three years’ supervised release, and a $5,000 fine. The judge who oversaw Mr. Littlejohn’s sentencing, admitted that she was ‘perplexed’ and ‘troubled’ by the plea agreement.

“After Mr. Littlejohn’s sentencing, the IRS began notifying and assisting affected taxpayers. In May 2024, an IRS spokesman stated, ‘[m]ore than 70,000 people received the initial notice that their information was involved in the breach.’ However, in December 2024, the IRS issued a second wave of notifications to additional taxpayer victims. On February 14, 2025, the IRS disclosed to the Committee that it had ‘mailed notifications to 405,427 taxpayers whose taxpayer information was inappropriately disclosed by Mr. Littlejohn’ and that ’89 [percent] of the[se] taxpayers are business entities.’

“In light of this new disclosure that Mr. Littlejohn leaked hundreds of thousands of taxpayers’ information—not just ‘thousands’ as previously suggested—the Biden-Harris Administration’s decision to charge him with just one count of unauthorized disclosure of tax information is even more concerning. The Committee has jurisdiction over criminal law and federal law enforcement pursuant to House Rule X. As such, to develop effective legislation, such as reforms to DOJ procedures governing plea agreements and new statutory limits of the Crime Victims’ Rights Act, Mr. Littlejohn’s testimony is necessary.

“Accordingly, we write to request Mr. Littlejohn’s testimony before the Committee on the Judiciary as soon as practicable. Please confirm his appearance before the Committee as soon as possible, but no later than 5:00 p.m. on March 31, 2025. We will also work with the Federal Bureau of Prisons to facilitate his testimony in a timely manner.”

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

Marines Urged by Woke Study to Use Gender-Neutral Terms in Boot Camp

8

ANALYSIS – In the most glaring example of wokeness in the military, which the Marine Commandant recently claimed wasn’t an issue in our beloved Corps, jarheads are being urged not to use sir or ma’am in Marine boot camp.

According to the Marine Corps Times, this is seen as part of a sweeping effort to avoid ‘misgendering’ drill instructors. This is something all Marines know has been a huge and pressing issue at boot camp for decades, as we have so many non-binary and trans drill instructors.

Please note my sarcasm.

The recommendation is part of a massive, recently completed, 738-page academic report from the University of Pittsburgh, which was commissioned by the Corps in 2020.

Instead of sir or ma’am the 22 University of Pittsburgh Academics that concocted the study – headed by biologists Bradley C. Nindl and Mita Lovalekar, recommend aspiring privates call their superiors by their last names. 

The study notes that other military branches have made strides to “de-emphasize gender” by using other names instead. 

The Marine Corps Times reports:

Instead of saying ‘ma’am’ or ‘sir,’ recruits in these Services refer to their drill instructors using their ranks or roles followed by their last names. Gendered identifiers prime recruits to think about or visually search for a drill instructor’s gender first, before their rank or role.

The far-left report is riddled with other woke ideas and includes a detailed study on improving gender integration at boot camp.

One important figure who thankfully appeared hesitant about this gender-neutral proposal was Col. Howard Hall, chief of staff for Marine Corps Training and Education Command.

Hall and others maintain that even if the Corps implements the change at its training facilities, recruits will then need to re-adapt to again addressing senior officers by ‘sir’ or ‘ma’am’ when they enter the fleet, as Marines in the real world would likely not enforce the rule.

 Hall told the Marine Corps Times, in slightly mangled terms, and some big words:

Honestly, that’s not a quick fix. What are inculcating in our young recruits that will or will not be reinforced when they graduate and enter the fleet Marine force? So again, we want to avoid any quick-fix solutions that introduce perturbations down the line.

And yes, while we all want to avoid ‘perturbations’ down the line, more importantly we want to avoid sheer idiocy right now.

Maybe our Marine officers should learn to be blunter.

This study also shows why the military needs to stop relying so much on outside consultants and academics, and their idiotic, ideologically-driven studies, to guide its policies.

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

Amanda Head: Biden Crimes Beginning to Unravel

2
Joe Biden via Gage Skidmore Flickr

The walls are closing in…Are the Bidens done for?

Watch Amanda explain the situation below:

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

Amanda Head: Dodgers Host Christian Faith Event!

0

We had to see this for ourselves! Los Angeles Dodgers hosted a Christian faith event at the ballpark…

See how the night went:

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

Backlash Grows as Well-Known Conservatives Sell Out to Woke Bud Light

4
Mike Mozart, CC BY 2.0 via Wikimedia Commons

ANALYSIS – Easily bought conservatives. In the aftermath of the brutal fallout from Bud Light’s woke transgender promotion fiasco with man-pretending-to-be-a-woman, ‘transgender influencer’ Dylan Mulvaney, the beer giant tried everything to woo back angry conservatives who have been successfully boycotting it. 

Bud Light sales have crashed, dropping almost over 27% in a few short months.

In a panicked response, parent company Anheuser-Busch brought back the majestic Clydesdale horses, it also highlighted its events for, and donations to, veteran’s groups. It even made a commercial with football star Travis Kelce. 

But nothing. Nada.

Videos and images of empty Bud Light venues went viral, as did shelves filled with untouched Bud Light cases being almost given away free. Bud Light kept crashing and Mexico’s Modelo beer passed it up as top-selling beer in America.

Along the way, Modelo became a sponsor of the UFC.

The only thing the American beer behemoth hasn’t done is apologize for its huge mistake. And Bud Light executives, apparently fearing a minority of leftist woke activists more than they fear losing hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars, stubbornly refuse to do that.

Bud Light even co-sponsored an LGBTQ+ Pride event in Arizona over the weekend.

Instead, Anheuser-Busch made a more than $100 million bet (“well into nine figures”), and essentially bought a powerful, Trump-supporting conservative personality to become its shill, and affiliated itself with one of the most conservative and masculine sports entertainment venues in the country.

The big conservative personality is UFC CEO Dana White, the organization is the UFC, promoter of mixed martial arts (MMA) fights. Both are being paid handsomely via a “multi-year marketing partnership” to promote Bud Light as the much-hated beer returns as the official beer of the sports juggernaut. 

As part of Dana White’s new job promoting his sellout, he is doing the rounds of conservative media. As part of that ‘we aren’t woke’ spin tour, he went on the Sean Hannity show to repeatedly claim – unconvincingly to me – that the UFC, Anheuser-Busch and Bud Light “are very aligned when it comes to our core values.”

That is the talking point. You will hear it a lot.

Well, apparently that’s all it took for Hannity to embrace Bud Light’s faux return to the conservative fold. After a little mild, mostly symbolic, pushback, Hannity quickly folded and said he could give the unrepentant woke beer brand ‘one more chance.’

White also went on the The Charlie Kirk Show on October 26 to push back at conservative critics calling him a sellout. He said he admired the beer company’s core values, adding: “It’s this unbelievable, powerful, American-built business…”

When discussing the deal, conservative radio hosts Buck Sexton and Clay Travis (who I generally agree with and like) also sympathized with White and the UFC, meekly saying, ‘that’s a lot of money,’ and they might take it from Bud Light too. 

One of the two also predicted that Bud Light’s huge bet with White and the UFC might pay off, and in a year the transgender boycott will be forgotten, seemingly trying to help make it so.

I hope they are all dead wrong, and their kowtowing to Bud Light just to please Dana White and his powerful organization will be condemned by conservatives. And there is evidence that a backlash against the UFC decision is now growing.

It has ignited a firestorm of criticism on Elon Musk’s social media platform X. Many fans have said they will now be boycotting the UFC and canceling their pay-per-view subscription because of the brand partnership.

As Newsweek reported:

“I’m canceling my subscription and never buying ANY PPV (pay-per-view) fights anymore until this sponsorship is gone. This is the worst business deal UFC has ever made EVER,” one angry fan wrote.

“How about you explain your pathetic Bud Light sponsorship!!?? What you doing rainbow uniforms next?? Canceling my UFC fight pass subscription,” said another.

“I just canceled my ESPN+ subscription. I used to buy every PPV but this is the last straw,” wrote another.

A fourth added: “Canceled my UFC fight pass subscription. Enjoy your Bud Light, hope it was worth it.”

But realize it’s not just Dana White and the UFC that are sellouts, it’s also conservative powerhouse commentators like Sean Hannity, and lesser ones like Buck and Clay who seem to be quickly and meekly surrendering to Bud Light and their new partners, the UFC.

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

FBI Sued For Records On Collusion With Anti-Trump Group

2

Americans may soon learn more about how a FBI agent worked with a liberal group to target President Donald Trump in a criminal investigation.

The non-profit public interest law firm Judicial Watch announced in a statement it “filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice for communications between former Assistant Special Agent in Charge Timothy Thibault and the anti-Trump organization American Oversight.”

“It’s a shame that we must sue to get these records about how the Biden gang at the FBI and DOJ tried to rig an election by jailing Trump for disputing the 2020 election,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “It’s past time for these institutions to focus on transparency under law, so the American people can know the full truth on the lawfare attack perpetrated on Trump.”

Judicial Watch reports it filed the suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia “after the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) failed to respond to a January 31, 2025, FOIA request for:”

Records and communications between Timothy Thibault, former [Assistant Special Agent in Charge, Washington Field Office] and the non-profit organization American Oversight, 1030 15th St. NW, B255, Washington, D.C. 20005, email domain: @americanoversight. The search terms for this request are a) Trump b) Electors c) Investigation d) election

According to Judicial Watch, “in July 2022, U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) reportedly warned then-Attorney General Merrick Garland that Thibault and an official in the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section, Richard Pilger, were ‘deeply involved in the decisions to open and pursue election-related investigations against President Trump. At the time, whistleblowers told Grassley that the Thibault-Pilger investigation’s predicating document was based on information from “liberal nonprofit American Oversight.”’ Thibault retired in August 2022.”

Grassley and Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) have revealed in a statement that:

Internal FBI emails and predicating documents provided to Grassley and released jointly by the two senators show Timothy Thibault, a former FBI Assistant Special Agent in Charge (ASAC) who was forced to retire from the Bureau after Grassley exposed his public anti-Trump bias, authored the initial language for what ultimately became Jack Smith’s federal case against Trump regarding the 2020 presidential election. Records show Thibault essentially opened and approved his own investigation.

Judicial Watch reports American Oversight describes itself as “founded in 2017 in response to the unprecedented challenges that the Trump administration posed to our nation’s democratic ideals and institutions.…” Earlier this year, Politico described it as, “A left-leaning watchdog group … working to gather materials that could feed Congressional investigations into the Trump administration.”

Biden’s ‘Puppy Sex Role Play,’ ‘Non-Binary’ Energy Official Arrested for Stealing Designer Bag

5
Arrest image via Pixabay

ANALYSIS – Stranger than fiction. Can’t make this stuff up. The cross-dressing, ‘puppy sex role play,’ ‘non-binary’ Department of Energy (DOE) official appointed by Joe Biden, was placed on leave last month after he was reportedly caught on camera stealing an expensive suitcase at a midwestern airport terminal.

This is according to a report in the New York Post.

His criminal case is now in court. 

According to court filings, Sam Brinton, the deputy assistant secretary for spent fuel and waste disposition at the Department of Energy’s Office of Nuclear Energy was charged with felony theft after allegedly snatching a Vera Bradley suitcase reportedly worth $2,325 from baggage claim at the Minneapolis-St. Paul Airport on Sept. 16.

Brinton, who has a shaved head, mustache, an affinity for wearing lipstick, women’s dresses, and high heels, and uses idiotic plural ‘they/them’ pronouns, initially denied taking the expensive designer luggage.

https://twitter.com/sbrinton/status/1542288527920185344

However, Brinton was captured on surveillance video grabbing the luggage and quickly removing the real owner’s ID tag, before scurrying away.

Investigators said Brinton was later seen using the stolen Vera Bradley suitcase at least twice while traveling to Washington, DC, within weeks of snatching it.

He is one of the U.S. government’s first ‘non-binary’ (aka – openly mentally ill) officials.

Public Health Service Admiral Richard (who now goes by Rachel) Levine identifies as a woman, so he is binary, just a different gender from what his biology dictates.

Both, of course, are Biden appointees.

Brinton is also a “queer activist” who brags about his “kink” of leading other gay men who are pretending to be dogs around on leashes before having sex with them.

As one Twitter user noted:

He doesn’t care about that. But he does care that this was the reason he was picked by Biden for this senior government post.

Brinton is charged with felony theft of movable property without consent and, if convicted, faces up to five years in prison and a $10,000 fine. Brinton’s hearing is scheduled for December 19.

It is unknown whether he would be sent to a men’s or women’s correctional facility, or whether he would be allowed to wear dresses.

Please note – unlike too many other news writers, journalists, and outlets, I won’t confuse my readers, and enable mental illness, by also using idiotic plural pronouns to refer to a single individual.

Let’s see how this story plays out.

Hopefully, there will be no gay men ‘puppies’ involved.

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