It’s time to run to your local movie theaters.
A new faith-based film “Jesus Revolution” is setting the box office on fire. The new film has already surpassed numerous Oscar-nominated films’ box office earnings.
Watch Amanda explain the phenomenon below:
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
In an event unprecedented in American history, a former U.S. president, protected by U.S. Secret Service agents, and currently running for president, was booked on federal criminal charges Tuesday by U.S. Marshals at the U.S. federal courthouse in Miami, before being taken to be fingerprinted and processed.
Donald Trump pled ‘not guilty’ to all charges.
The charges relate to Trump taking a lot of highly classified documents from the White House after he left office. And once discovered, he gave multiple bizarre reasons for having them.
According to the indictment, the highly sensitive materials Trump kept included documents about overseas nuclear weapons holdings and various military plans.
But they are really all about the fact that he refused to turn many of them over for upwards of 18 months. And I have criticized Trump for doing that.
So, did Hillary Clinton get treated differently? Of course! And is Joe Biden’s Department of Justice (DOJ) out to get Trump?
Absolutely! That’s a given.
But Trump could still have avoided all this had he behaved differently, before and after he got caught. And that’s important too.
As with Richard Nixon and Watergate, it was about the cover up.
The 37 charges against Trump include violations of the Espionage Act or the willful retention of national security information as well as one count of “conspiracy to obstruct justice,” one count of “withholding a document or record,” one count of “corruptly concealing a document or record,” one count of “concealing a document in a deferral investigation,” one count of “scheme to conceal” and one count of “false statements and representations.”
Based on the evidence represented in the indictment, and from his own words and deeds, it seems that he did do most of the things he is accused of, despite the Team Trump calls that this is only a political prosecution.
I have said before that Trump basically dared the Justice Department to come after him. And I still believe that had Trump simply turned over all the classified materials when they were first requested, this would have likely ended last year without any criminal proceedings.
But Trump didn’t.
The FBI then conducted a very showy surprise raid on the ex-president’s Florida home, Mar-a-Lago, on August 8, 2022. That raid, and the documents recovered there, eventually led to the 37-count indictment that now put Trump where he is.
THE FBI RAID ON MAR-A-LAGO
Many condemned the FBI raid that launched all this as unprecedented and wrong, including me. I argued that it sent a horrible message to the world and looked highly political. (As does the indictment, arrest, and potential trial).
Apparently, the FBI had doubts about the raid as well.
Steven D’Antuono, who left the FBI late last year, explained the FBI-DOJ disagreements over the planning and execution of the Mar-a-Lago search during an interview last week with the House Judiciary Committee.
While he called the back-and-forth between DOJ and the FBI “an everyday discussion,” he noted that it still created “consternation” among the law enforcement officials, reported Politico.
According to the interview transcripts reviewed by Politico, D’Antuono said DOJ wanted the FBI to quickly seize the classified documents from Mar-a-Lago, claiming they could fall into the wrong hands. But the FBI’s Washington Field Office team preferred to seek Trump’s permission, through his attorneys, to search the premises.
The FBI even proposed a plan to surveil Mar-a-Lago in case Trump’s team tried taking any of the disputed papers offsite, according to D’Antuono.
The FBI “had a plan in place to have surveillance around if we needed to,” he said.
“Again, no one was there. So, if they brought in — they – meaning the [former] president’s, you know, people — brought in a big box truck, we would see it, right, and we would have the search warrant in hand and be able to act at that point.”
In the end, DOJ got its way, and they conducted the surprise raid. Fortunately, Trump wasn’t there when it occurred. And that was at least something.
“I didn’t want the spectacle for obvious reasons of why we’re sitting here today. … It’s a reputational risk, right, and that’s the way I looked at it from the Bureau,” reported Politico.
Unfortunately, the FBI has still suffered a great deal of reputational risk, as has the DOJ under Biden. This all stinks as political.
But Trump has played a big part in all this as well.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – In his Twitter Spaces debut Tuesday night, called “Tucker on Twitter,” former Fox News host Tucker Carlson immediately accused Ukraine of being responsible for the catastrophic attack on the Nova Kakhovka dam in Southern Ukraine.
And he may be right.
Ukraine and Russia have routinely accused each other of shelling the dam, the hydroelectric station and the nearby Zaporizhia nuclear power plant.
Both sides have blamed the other for the attack, in what appears to be a war crime. Kyiv blamed Moscow for the “terrorist attack,” but the Kremlin claimed that Ukraine had struck the dam to impact Russian-controlled Crimea’s water supplies.
As Newsweek reported, that is part of Tucker’s claim, too.
And, despite his spotty track record on speculation, in this case, he may be right. Or at least, the assumption that Russia is always the culprit is no longer valid.
Based on recent reporting, which I wrote about here, Ukraine may, in fact, have been responsible for the serious sabotage of the Nord Stream undersea gas pipelines in September 2022, which was long blamed on Russia.
This makes the always-blame Russia crowd look less credible. But that doesn’t mean Tucker’s always-blame-everyone-except-Russia approach is any better.
While on Fox, Tucker repeatedly blamed the United States and Joe Biden for being behind the Nord Stream attack.
On Feb. 24 he said: “So the Biden administration committed the single largest most profound act of industrial terrorism of sabotaging history. They blew up the Nord Stream pipeline …”
And that has always been a stretch. Instead, The Post reporting today reinforces my earlier conclusion that it is “likely, the U.S. was aware but turned a blind eye.”
Thus, as far as we can tell, Biden knew about it beforehand but was unwilling or unable to do anything about it.
Tucker’s claims aren’t helped when he spouts pro-Russian talking points in his video, such as:
The Kakhovka dam was effectively Russian. It was built by the Russian government. It currently sits in Russian- controlled territory. The dam’s reservoir supplies water to Crimea, which has been for the last 240 years home of the Russian Black Sea Fleet.
Firstly, the ‘Soviets’ built the dam during the USSR, not the ‘Russians,’ and the USSR no longer exists. Secondly, it doesn’t matter how long Russia’s Black Sea Fleet was based in Crimea; it belongs to Ukraine because that’s what happened when the USSR dissolved in 1991 and Ukraine became independent.
Tucker’s Trumpian personal insults, like describing Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, as a “sweaty and rat-like comedian-turned-oligarch,” probably don’t help his credibility much either.
Tucker is on firmer ground when he argues that: “Blowing up the dam may be bad for Ukraine, but it hurts Russia more, and for precisely that reason, the Ukrainian government has considered destroying it.”
Especially when he cites a December report from The Washington Post in which a Ukrainian general spoke of using U.S.-made HIMARS launchers to “test strike” on the Kakhovka dam.
So, what are the facts?
The dam spanning the Dnipro River was breached on Tuesday, flooding swaths of territory and threatening crucial water supplies to Europe’s largest nuclear power plant.
At least 42,000 people and 1,500 square miles of land are at risk from the flooding caused by the destruction of the dam, likely slowing any potential Ukrainian military advance in the Dnipro River delta.
Much of the Dnipro River delta will become inaccessible for land operations, raising suspicions that Russia deliberately sabotaged the dam to prevent an expected Ukrainian counteroffensive.
However, the flooding has disproportionately affected the Russian-occupied side of the river.
The Kakhovka reservoir does supply Russian-occupied Kherson Oblast and the Crimea peninsula with fresh water.
Zelensky has said that the only way to destroy the dam is through mining and explosives and emphasized that Russian forces have now occupied the dam for over a year.
In a statement, Ukraine’s Southern Operational Command said, “Russian occupation troops blew up the dam” at Nova Kakhovka in the Kherson region.
Blaming “Russian terrorists” for the attack, Zelensky said on Twitter that “the destruction of the Kakhovka hydroelectric power plant dam only confirms for the whole world that they must be expelled from every corner of Ukrainian land.”
In the end, Tucker may be right. Ukraine could have been behind the attack.
But he is far more credible when he is less bombastic and emphatic with his theories. Such as when he states:
So really, once the facts start coming in, it becomes much less of a mystery what might have happened to the dam, and a fair person would conclude that the Ukrainians probably blew it up, just as you would assume they blew up Nord Stream, the Russian natural gas pipeline last fall.
Tucker ended his new Twitter show by promising to be back with “much more, very soon.” I’m looking forward to it.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
INVESTIGATION – As I noted in my late January PDB, a ‘Democrat Colluded With Air Force Against Black Female GOP Candidate.’
In that case, the Air Force took the fall for the release of the congressional candidate’s military record, blaming “a junior individual [who] didn’t follow proper procedures.”
However, Jennifer-Ruth Green, a Republican, continues to blame U.S. Rep. Frank Mrvan and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) for illegally obtaining and releasing the information through corrupt Air Force personnel to damage her campaign in the weeks leading up to the November election.
The release despicably included information about a sexual assault Green had suffered while serving in Iraq.
But, it seems there is much more to the story.
We now learn she wasn’t the only target of the corrupt DCCC.
We also learn that a Democrat-linked consulting and research firm called ‘Due Diligence Group’ (DDG) has been at the center of a partisan effort to improperly, and likely illegally, obtain the service records of at least 11 service members via fraudulent SF-180 requests.
According to data from OpenSecrets.org, the DCCC has paid more than $100,000 to DDG since 2021.
SF-180s are used by veterans, authorized legal recipients and next of kin to legally obtain information from military personnel records.
Third-party requests require the service member to authorize their request with their signature.
In these 11 cases, it is clear the service members did not provide their authorization.
Just the News reports:
In an unprecedented breach, the Air Force improperly released to a research firm tied to Democrats’ congressional campaign arm the confidential personnel files of eleven members of the military, including one involving a retired lieutenant colonel running for office as a Republican that detailed how she had been sexually assaulted in the Air Force, Congress has been told.
And the House Armed Services and Oversight committee are demanding answers. The news outlet continues:
[In a February 13 letter], House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mike Rogers and House Oversight and Accountability Committee Chairman James Comer are demanding that Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin explain how he will prevent future breaches of military members’ private information while pressing to know if there will be criminal prosecutions.
Just the News further reports on the letter:
“The Office of the Secretary of the Air Force (OSAF) has informed the Committee that it released 11 individuals’ records over a 14-month period from October 2021-December 2022 to a private research firm which allegedly misrepresented itself in order to obtain access to the personnel records without authorization or consent.”
Rogers and Comer wrote that the release of other service members’ personal information highlights “not only the inadequacy of procedures to secure military personnel files, but also raises concerning questions of possible illicit motive or political partisanship.”
“This conduct by the Air Force is, at a minimum, unacceptable,” they added, “The conduct by the research firm is quite possibly criminal.”
Just the News reported that Rogers told the outlet that much more needs to be investigated.
Rogers stated:“It’s abhorrent that a Democrat-aligned firm would do something so despicable as fraudulently obtaining service records. Chairman James Comer and I pressed the Department of Defense for answers on this egregious breach.”
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – BOOM! – The landmark Supreme Court decision against racial and sex discrimination by schools and universities (under the guise of ‘affirmative action’) will also impact corporate ‘diversity’ programs based on the same flawed, discriminatory ideas.
In what has become a major legal development in a growing wave of anti-wokeness, corporations will soon have to reconsider all their – likely illegal – Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) efforts.
While pushed by the increasingly leftist establishment, most of these woke programs have been illegal under U.S. state and federal laws, which explicitly prohibit discrimination by race and gender. But until now the courts let them get away with it.
Now the Supreme Court has made it official. Affirmative action (aka – discriminatory ‘diversity’ efforts) are out.
The court held by that Harvard and University of North Carolina’s (UNC’s) admissions programs violate the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Students for Fair Admissions, a conservative group, sued Harvard and UNC over their ‘race-conscious’ admissions programs, arguing they intentionally discriminated against Asian American applicants.
In the decision, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote: “Both programs lack sufficiently focused and measurable objectives warranting the use of race, unavoidably employ race in a negative manner, involve racial stereotyping, and lack meaningful end points.”
He added: “We have never permitted admissions programs to work in that way, and we will not do so today.”
Previously, the Supreme Court in the 2003 case of Grutter v. Bollinger, ruled that “the use of an applicant’s race as one factor in an admissions policy of a public educational institution does not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment if the policy is narrowly tailored to the compelling interest of promoting a diverse student body.”
This was intended to be a very narrow exception, but soon became far more. And this helped woke corporate America justify its own discriminatory DEI programs.
A 2022 Harvard Business Review 2022 survey, reported by The Epoch Times, showed that more than 60 percent of U.S. companies had a DEI program, which separates employees according to race and gender.
After the 2020 Black Lives Matter (BLM) riots, major corporations announced explicit race-based hiring and promotion policies.
But now that the 2003 decision has been superseded, they will all need to revisit the legality of their DEI programs. As Kevin Stocklin explains in The Epoch Times:
In an amicus brief regarding the Harvard and UNC case, the Hamilton Lincoln Law Institute and attorney Ilya Shapiro argued that “what this Court authorized in Grutter as a temporary, grudging exception to America’s ideals and generally applicable law of Equal Protection … has metastasized into a threat blooming across the legal landscape, the economy, and society as a whole.”
The exceptions granted by the Grutter case were narrowly tailored to government-funded universities’ admissions policies, and were intended to be a temporary remedy that would include “sunset” provisions. But corporations have applied them as a precedent to race-based policies on staffing and training, and expanded them to include new racial goals.
“To the extent that corporate America has thought that Grutter provided some kind of fig leaf to the illegal discrimination they’ve been engaging in for the last two decades, this would be a really good time for them to rethink that,” Morenoff said. “It never made sense for corporate America to argue that there was a diversity rationale exception to our civil rights laws,” he said.
However, if the Supreme Court decision reverses Grutter or the Johnson executive order, even that questionable pretense would be gone. Rather than standing on thin ice, Morenoff said, “they’re standing on no ice at all.”
This is the next battleground – using this Supreme Court precedent to eliminate discrimination by sex and race from corporate America.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – While most of us don’t care much about what a deranged former porn star turned ‘Only Fans’ webcam model (‘cam girl’) says, it’s a sign of our times that this is news.
Mia Khalifa is a 30-year-old Lebanese American born in Beirut and raised Catholic. But her previous life choices and current words and actions are far from Christian.
Once PornHub’s highest-ranked adult star, Khalifa left the hard-core porn business to focus on ‘Only Fans.’
Khalifa, who has long called Israel an apartheid state, provoked outrage with her enthusiastic support for Hamas terrorists following their horrific surprise attack on Israel which has taken over 800 Israeli lives, mostly civilians.
Her support for the terrorists was shameless calling them ‘freedom fighters’ — even urging the brutal murderers to “flip their phones and film” their murderous rampage on Israel in the “horizontal.”
When criticized for her horizontal comment, she responded, “I just wanna make sure there’s 4k footage of my people breaking down the walls of the open air prison they’ve been forced out of their homes and into so we have good options for the history books that write about how how they freed themselves from apartheid.”
Fox News reported:
She also reposted a message that said, “Babe wake up Palestine is getting liberated,” and mocked video of Israelis fleeing from attackers. Khalifa reposted anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian messages throughout the multipronged terrorist attack that left hundreds dead. Khalifa celebrated as terrifying videos, which included footage of Hamas kidnapping women and children while groups of young partygoers were tied up and taken into Gaza, shocked most onlookers.
In a separate, apparently now-deleted post on X, Khalifa reportedly called a photo of Hamas terrorists in a pickup truck a “Renaissance painting.”
Her support for Islamists terrorists is ironic considering that the pornographic performer also made headlines for claiming she received ISIS death threats as recently as 2018 over a sex scene she filmed wearing a hijab.
Her current online rantings seem to also be hurting her pocketbook.
Earlier, Khalifa doubled down amidst the backlash: “I’d say supporting Palestine has lost me business opportunities, but I’m more angry at myself for not checking whether or not I was entering into business with Zionists. My bad,” she wrote.
But maybe the online backlash has finally caused her to backtrack, with the disgraced porn actress apparently shifting from being pro-Hamas, to simply being pro-Palestinian.
Monday morning Khalifa posted on X:
Hamas is not Palestine’s army, their actions do not reflect the Palestinian people. Hamas formed in 1987, 20 years AFTER the occupation, as a means of resistance to ethnic cleansing and apartheid. They are an extremist group calling on other extremist groups that also do not represent the masses of people.
While no one should really care what Khalifa says, she can be seen as a bellwether of certain online opinions. And it is important to read them and counter outrageous opinions like hers wherever we find them.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
Former President Donald Trump is right: There’s no reason he should sign a GOP loyalty oath in order to participate in the candidates’ debates.
Such oaths, which the Republican National Committee employed in the 2016 presidential primary – only to see the last remaining candidates, including Trump, abandon it – aren’t just signs of a party’s weakness; they are also profoundly silly and even un-American.
Yes, we swear plenty of legally enforceable oaths – in court cases, for example, or declarations on tax forms and other legal documents. But oaths binding candidates to support someone who they’ve campaigned against, throwing elbows, mud and other rhetorical barbs at them for months to convince voters the guy was a bum?
I’ll defer to what Sen. Ted Cruz said of such an oath back in the 2016 presidential primary:
Cruz has dodged the question of whether the pledge still holds by insisting he will be the nominee. Though on Friday, in an apparent reference to Trump, Cruz said, “I don’t make a habit out of supporting people who attack my wife and attack my family.”
We all know that Cruz eventually did support Trump’s candidacy and became one of his biggest defenders in the Senate (which was amusing).
But the oath? Nah. The 2016 primary should have been instructive to party leaders that such commitments are transactional at best and unenforceable in fact. Which brings us to the state parties.
They have been long-time players in loyalty oaths, often attempting to bind voters to the party’s eventual nominees. While such pledges are even sillier and utterly unenforceable, that hasn’t stopped new ones from cropping up this year. Consider the case of Florida‘s pledge:
Christian Ziegler, the chairman of the Florida GOP, said in an email that the loyalty pledge is an effort to “ensure maximum unity” headed into the 2024 general election.
“The days of outlier party grifters – such as Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger – using Republican Party resources to secure a title and then weaponize that title against our own team must end,” Ziegler said, referring to two former House members, who are among Trump’s most vocal GOP critics.
“Contested primaries are part of the process,” he said, “but we must always remember that the Democrats are the true threat to the America we love and we must be unified to defeat every single one of them.”
The true threat to America is noxious oaths that bind us to men rather than pledges or oaths that bind individuals to uphold the law or tell the truth.
You know, like the only oath that should ever matter for a presidential candidate: the one the Constitution requires:
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
Every other partisan oath is legally dubious, intellectually suspect and, in the end, not worth the paper it’s printed on.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk. It first appeared in American Liberty News.
The Republican National Committee’s (RNC) spending is out of control.
Watch Amanda break down the disaster below:
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
Congress is taking action after a Virginia prosecutor seems to have allowed liberal activists to cultivate threats against a top Trump official and his children.
The U.S. House Judiciary Committee report Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) has “sent a letter to Parisa Dehghani-Tafti, prosecutor for Arlington County and the City of Falls Church, demanding information about her ignoring threats to White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy Stephen Miller and the intimidation of his family.”
“The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) determined that a left-wing activist likely violated state and federal anti-doxing laws when she posted flyers depicting Miller’s face and publicizing his home address. The FBI sought a search warrant for Wien’s phone; however, U.S. Magistrate Judge Lindsey Vaala, who has previously donated to the presidential campaigns of Presidents Obama and Biden, denied the FBI’s request,” the committee reports.
“According to investigators involved in the case, Dehghani-Tafti has been ‘stymying the investigation’ into the threats made against the Miller family. Dehghani-Tafti’s conduct suggests that she is willing to not only ignore threats of political violence against those with whom she disagrees, but will actively side with those making the threats,” the committee reports.
“The Miller family deserves the same protections afforded to all Americans, particularly when it comes to feeling safe in their own home. Their safety is especially important in light of recent left-wing political violence against prominent Republicans, and the election of an attorney general in Virginia who fantasizes about murdering the children of his political opponents,” the committee adds.
In the letter to Dehghani-Tafti, Jordan writes, in part:
Since the 118th Congress, the Committee on the Judiciary has been conducting oversight of politically motivated prosecutorial actions of state and local prosecutors. On September 11, 2025, a left-wing activist, Barbara Wien, posted flyers in her Arlington, Virginia neighborhood depicting White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy Stephen Miller’s face and publicizing his home address. While posting the flyers, Wien walked past Miller’s house and attempted to intimidate his wife, who was sitting on the front porch, by indicating she was watching the Miller family,” the committee further reports.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) determined Wien likely violated state and federal anti-doxing laws and sought a search warrant for her phone. However, U.S. Magistrate Judge Lindsey Vaala, who has previously donated to the presidential campaigns of Presidents Obama and Biden, denied the FBI’s request” the committee writes. On October 1, 2025, Virginia State Police secured a warrant from a state court judge.
After determining that Wien had misled investigators during an interview on October 1, the FBI sought another search warrant. Once again, Magistrate Judge Vaala denied the request. On October 2, 2025, in the matter pending before a court in Arlington County, you made ‘an unusual request’ by siding ‘with the defense’ in requesting that the judge overseeing the matter limit the search warrant and the information that state police could share with the FBI, which the judge so ordered. According to investigators involved in the case, you have been “stymying the investigation” into the threats made against the Miller family.
Additionally, you reportedly support a left-wing ‘activist group’ known as Arlington Neighbors United for Humanity (ANUFH). Wien is a member of ANUFH and the flyers she posted displaying the Millers’ home address also featured a QR code linking to ANUFH’s Instagram account. ANUFH has previously left threatening chalk messages outside the Millers’ home and praised the violent anarchist network Antifa.
Your unmistakably partisan actions suggest that you are willing to not only ignore threats of political violence against those with whom you disagree, but will actively side with those making the threats. The Miller family deserves the same protections afforded to all Americans, particularly when it comes to feeling safe in their own home. Their safety is especially important in light of recent left-wing political violence against prominent Republicans, and the election of an attorney general in Virginia who fantasizes about murdering the children of his political opponents.”
The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk.
ALERT – If you’re reading this on your cell phone, and you are a Secret Service agent or officer on duty, please stop and put away the phone – immediately.
Otherwise, you can continue reading.
Ok. Now that we got that out of the way, we can inform you of how an intoxicated intruder was able to enter the home of Joe Biden’s National Security Advisor – Jake Sullivan – back in April.
While Sullivan isn’t particularly impressive (and I’m being gracious), he is one of Biden’s top national security officials. By virtue of his position, he is a very big deal.
He has direct access to the president, the White House, and to the nation’s most classified intelligence and national security information.
Terrorists or spies would love to get their hands on some of that stature, or just get into their homes undetected.
And one unidentified person did just that. But how?
Well, sadly the agents protecting Sullivan were distracted, at least in part, because they were using their personal cell phones while on duty.
A scourge that is affecting most of society.
This is according to an internal investigation by the Secret Service.
The incident at Sullivan’s home occurred in the early morning hours. Sullivan reportedly confronted the intruder inside his home and later told investigators that he believed the person, who was later seen on surveillance video entering and exiting the property, was intoxicated and entered the home by mistake.
Sullivan made the confused man leave his home and then went outside to tell the agents what happened.
Whether the intruder was really just a drunk nobody, or just pretending to be one, is still to be determined.
Meanwhile, Sullivan and his family were unharmed, but the Secret Service officers won’t be so lucky.
As CNN reported: “A law enforcement official familiar with the internal investigation said the agents on duty that night and their supervisors, are likely to be subject to disciplinary action, including an evaluation of whether they can maintain their federal security clearance, a requirement for their positions.”
So, basically, they could lose their jobs over this. And they probably should.
More importantly, the Secret Service, and all federal law enforcement agencies, and their private security contractors, must enforce rules limiting personal cell phone use while on duty.
Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle appears to be doing just that when last week she ordered increased penalties for employees who violate agency policies while on duty, including the use of personal electronic devices on the job.
According to CNN, Cheatle ordered “disciplinary penalties be increased to up to 21-day suspensions, and up to removal for infractions that lead to operational failure. Those include for the use of personal phones or the use of alcohol while on assignments.”
Secret Service spokesman Anthony Guglielmi stated:
We have zero tolerance for anything that jeopardizes operational success. While human errors may occur, what sets us apart is our unwavering commitment to maintaining very high professional standards and ethics. This includes enhanced penalties for incidents involving alcohol and a strict policy regarding personal cell phone use while on duty.
Well, that’s a start. The Secret Service is our nation’s, and perhaps the world’s, leading dignitary protection agency. It simply can’t allow things like this to happen.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
