Random

    Opinion

    Home Opinion

    Like the FBI, Politicized DHS Running ‘Shady’ (Likely Illegal) Domestic Intelligence Program

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    2

    ANALYSIS – It isn’t news that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has proven to be vulnerable to political pressure. Just look at the threat assessments produced in 2020 that single out ‘white supremacists’ as the ‘most lethal domestic terror threat’ in the U.S., despite their numbers being minuscule.

    According to that report, self-described ‘white supremacists’ were responsible for 49 homicides in 26 attacks spread across more than a decade and a half – from 2000 to 2016.

    Yes, that’s more murders than any other specific domestic extremist group but let’s get real. 

    There are more murders in Chicago in one weekend than the entire number of white supremacist killings nationwide in those sixteen years.

    This DHS report, though produced under the last year of Trump’s term, like many others recently by different federal agencies, like the FBI, is part of a wider political campaign that conflates the relatively small number of white supremacists, and other so-called right-wing extremists, with the tens of millions of mainstream conservatives and Trump supporters.

    And we can now add traditional Catholics to the feds’ “most wanted” list.

    The FBI recently produced a memo by its Richmond, Virginia, Field Office that was leaked on Jan. 23, 2023. 

    That memo, according to a group of 20 GOP state attorney generals, “identifies ‘radical-traditionalist Catholic[s]’ as potential ‘racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists.’”

    In their letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray and U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, Fox News reported, the AGs told the FBI and Department of Justice (DOJ) to “desist from investigating and surveilling Americans who have done nothing more than exercise their natural and constitutional right to practice their religion in a manner of their choosing.” 

    The AGS also asked that the DOJ and the FBI “reveal to the American public the extent to which they have engaged in such activities.”

    The AGs letter notes that the FBI memorandum deploys “alarmingly detailed theological distinctions to distinguish between the Catholics whom the FBI deems acceptable, and those it does not.”

    It’s in this context of politicized and weaponized federal law enforcement agencies, that this latest report of DHS malfeasance deserves special attention.

    Specifically, we are talking about the DHS Office of Intelligence and Analysis (OIA), whose leadership, according to Politico, was called “shady” and run “like a corrupt government.” 

    For years it has been operating a secretive domestic-intelligence gathering program that many DHS employees have complained may be illegal.

    The OIA’s Overt Human Intelligence Collection Program allows DHS officials to bypass lawyers and seek intelligence interviews with individuals being held in local jails, federal prisons, and immigrant detention centers.

    While most law-abiding U.S. citizens may not care much about this DHS target group, remember this is just another example of how elements of DHS appear corrupt, and play fast and loose with the law, and all our civil liberties.

    But the Department’s politicization is probably the biggest danger according to documents obtained by Politico.

    As the New York Post reports:

    The ability of DHS to be impartial and withstand caving to political pressure was also a major concern, documents show. 

    An internal analysis during the Trump administration found a “significant number of respondents cited concerns with politicization of analytic products and/or the perceptions of undue influence that may compromise the integrity of the work performed by employees. This concern touches on analytic topics, the review process, and the appropriate safeguards in place to protect against undue influence.”

    The document adds that “a number of respondents expressed concerns/challenges with the quality and effectiveness of I&A senior leadership” such as the “inability to resist political pressure.”

    “The workforce has a general mistrust of leadership resulting from orders to conduct activities they perceive to be inappropriate, bureaucratic, or political,” the document continues.

    It is clearly time to rein in rogue elements at DHS and FBI, but also to clean house at the top levels of both organizations, and DOJ.

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

    Senators Slam Liberal Scheme To House Illegal Aliens Instead Of Veterans

    By
    Donny Ferguson
    -
    5
    President Donald J. Trump participates in a roundtable discussion on immigration and border security at the U.S. Border Patrol Calexico Station Friday, April 5, 2019, in Calexico, Calif. (Official White House Photo by Shealah Craighead)

    A group of United States senators are sounding the alarm on an effort by President Joe Biden to give illegal aliens free taxpayer-funded housing while thousands of American veterans are homeless.

    To head off announced plans by the Biden administration to give free housing to illegal aliens, U.S. Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) introduced the Heroes Over Aliens Act to “prohibit the use of federal dollars to house illegal aliens in the United States when veterans remain homeless,.”

    “Veterans sacrificed for our country and deserve our thanks and support. The Heroes Over Aliens Act would prevent the Biden administration from prioritizing illegal immigrants over homeless heroes,” said Kennedy.

    Sens. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), Roger Marshall (R-Kan.), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) and Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) are cosponsoring the legislation.

    “With so many Americans, especially veterans, struggling thanks to Joe Biden’s failed economic policies, our country should not spend money housing the millions of migrants that his administration let cross our border. This bill will ensure that not a cent can be spent on shelter for illegal immigrants until our veterans are taken care of first,” said Cotton.

    “In Joe Biden’s America, illegal immigrants are prioritized over our veterans. As homelessness increases across the nation, it is unthinkable that taxpayer funds are used to house those who break the law instead of American heroes. It’s common sense to stop all federal funding for this offensive practice while there are still thousands of veterans living on the streets,” said Blackburn.

    “The Biden administration’s backwards border policies prioritize housing assistance for illegal aliens while neglecting homeless veterans. We must take care of each and every one of our own American heroes before using federal funds to house undocumented migrants,” said Cramer.

    The bill is in response to announced plans by the Biden administration to give illegal aliens housing at federal taxpayer expense, after some liberal cities and states have ordered hotels to give rooms to illegals and reportedly kicked out veterans and schoolchildren so government facilities can be used as illegal alien housing.

    “On June 12, 2023, August 21, 2023, and April 12, 2024, the Biden administration announced three separate actions to fund housing for immigrants—the majority of whom crossed the border illegally,” Kennedy’s office reports.

    “The Department of Housing and Urban Development’s 2023 Annual Homeless Assessment Report found that there were 35,574 homeless veterans living in the U.S.—a 7.4 percent increase from the previous report and the largest increase in 12 years,” Kennedy’s office adds.

    “The Biden administration’s open border policies have consumed federal and local resources and made it harder for states and localities to address veteran homelessness effectively,” Kennedy’s office concludes.

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

    Biden’s Totally Intentional Open Border Disaster

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    7
    CBP Photography, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

    ANALYSIS – I have long argued that Joe Biden’s border crisis is absolutely self-created, and it has become increasingly obvious that he in fact has essentially opened the border.

    And worse this is absolutely intentional.

    There can be no other explanation.

    Biden’s shameful denials that there is no border crisis show that he is either delusional or a pathological liar. 

    Or both.

    But his appointment of Kamala Harris, who can barely find Mexico on a map, as his border czar, also speaks volumes. 

    Neither has visited the border since coming to office two years ago.

    Yet the illegal migrant numbers and incidents are only mushrooming in magnitude. 

    And getting worse every day.

    The border is going from disastrous to cataclysmic.

    And it’s not just incompetence or bad policy.

    It is part of a plan. 

    Mark Morgan, former acting commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection says Team Biden “intentionally unsecured” the southern border because “they see a perceived political benefit from open borders.” 

    In a recent podcast with the Heritage Foundation, Morgan said of the border:

    It’s a total disaster, simply getting worse. And I think what’s important is we really need to compare it to the last year under the Trump administration. Now, look, this is not a Right or Left thing for me. This is about factual data.

    So if you look in the last fiscal year under the Trump administration, I think we were around 400,000 total encounters. What we saw the first fiscal year under the Biden administration, as you said, over 2 million. This last fiscal year, we had 2.7 million total encounters. In the first 23, now almost 24 months under this administration, we’ve seen over 4.7 million total encounters with another 1.2 million “got-aways.” So we’re actually getting close to 6 million total encounters, plus got-aways, in the first 24 months of this administration.

    Those data points, Virginia, alone are staggering. It’s the worst self-inflicted border crisis we’ve ever seen on our southern border and our lifetime and the data is undeniable.

    In response to a question about what the future may hold for the border under Team Biden’s remaining two years, Morgan said worst case things stay the same.

    Horrible.

    And that is unacceptable. As he added :

    It’s insanity. It’s absolutely unsustainable. And again, it’s jeopardizing every aspect of our nation’s safety and national security. We cannot allow this to happen.GAND

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

    Biden Defends China’s ‘COVID Freedom’ Protests, But Not U.S. and Canadian Ones 

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    0
    The White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

    ANALYSIS – The massive protests against the communist Chinese dictatorship, and its draconian anti-COVID repression continues.

    And so does the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) crackdown.

    As these Chinese ‘freedom protests’ grow and spread, hypocritical Western leaders, who until recently pursued their own, less harsh, COVID crackdowns and vaccine mandates, are showing their support.

    Among them, is Joe Biden. 

    A Monday White House statement in response to anti-lockdown demonstrations that swept through major Chinese cities reads:

    We think it’s going to be very difficult for the People’s Republic of China to be able to contain this virus through their zero COVID strategy. We’ve long said everyone has a right to peacefully protest, here in the United States and around the world. This includes the PRC.

    Sadly, while he could be far more aggressive in his response to China’s COVID repression, Biden was doing just the opposite with earlier Canadian and American COVID crackdown protests.

    Justin Trudeau’s authoritarian overkill in response to Canadian truckers was particularly egregious.

    An unquestionably authoritarian move, it received criticism from the left, right, and center.

    The leftist Canadian Civil Liberties Association called Trudeau’s actions “unnecessary, unjustifiable and unconstitutional.” 

    Reason Magazine’s J.D. Tuccille said at the time that Trudeau had a “bad case of China-envy.”

    Yet, Biden wholeheartedly backed Trudeau’s repression.

    As Reason explains:

    The Biden administration urged the Canadian government to use whatever means it had to reopen border crossings barricaded by the so-called “Freedom convoy” and get a handle on the protests.

    That’s according to revelations of an ongoing Canadian inquiry into Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s unprecedented invocation of Canada’s Emergencies Act.

    Why was Biden so gung-ho about Trudeau’s crushing of the peaceful trucker freedom protests?

    Reason argues that in part:

    Biden embraced an expansive view of his executive powers to effectively mandate vaccines for millions of Americans. That contributed to his support for the suppression of Canadian anti-mandate demonstrations. 

    REASON added: “The only people who seem to support Trudeau’s use of emergency powers against peaceful protestors are the prime minister himself—and the Biden White House.”

    And Biden’s strong backing of Trudeau’s repression makes his current defense of China’s protests all the more laughable.

    It also erodes his moral authority to lecture the Chinese government now on the right of the people to peaceful protest.

    As Reason concludes: “It’s also a lesson in how restrictions on freedom in one country can damage it everywhere.” 

    When America allows the crushing of political dissent at home and promotes repression by its liberal northern neighbor, it not only hurts us, it fuels more repression among our enemies.

    This only helps authoritarianism grow globally.

    Amanda Head: New Direct Connections Between Burisma And Joe!

    By
    Amanda Head
    -
    0

    President Joe Biden has a lot of explaining to do…

    Watch Amanda explain the situation below:

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

    Surge In Youth Mob Violence Reported Across US

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    7
    Police image via Pixabay free images

    ANALYSIS – The aftershocks from radical leftist movements, and the corresponding soft-on-crime approach of prosecutors across the country, is largely to blame for the current wave of lawlessness in many American cities.

    Sadly, it appears that most of the crime is being committed by mobs of teenagers in disadvantaged communities.

    I have recently written about the skyrocketing murder rate and carjackings in our nation’s capital here. I didn’t note then that much of that violent crime in Washington, D.C. is committed by young people. Some as young as 13.

    But frightening incidents of youth-led mob violence in two other cities graphically show how bad things really are.

    The Blaze reported that in what may be America’s most violent city: “Scores of thugs swarmed two Memphis gas stations over the weekend, stealing thousands of dollars of merchandise and destroying property. Looters also hit a 53-foot FedEx semi-trailer, stealing multiple packages.”

    Murders in Memphis are up 77% this year and on track to set an all-time city record.

    Some blame Steve Mulroy the city’s new soft-on crime Democrat district attorney, others, such as the mayor, blame soft-on crime courts. I would say it is likely both.

    Whichever is most to blame, James Davis, owner of L.R. Clothier, whose business was broken into early Sunday morning, said: “What this says to me is that people don’t fear any repercussions of their actions.”

    And that sums it up, as can be seen in the video below.

    The Blaze continued:

    Roughly $2,000 of items were stolen from the Exxon at 3483 Airways Boulevard. Over $15,000 of merchandise was taken from the Fill-N-Go gas station at 3084 South Third Street just hours later, where a clerk reported having a rifle pointed at him by a suspect. The mob is estimated to have inflicted $9,000 in damage at the second location.

    Footage of one of the incidents shows a mob of looters, some masked and others bare faced, ransacking a gas station and absconding with everything from candy to an electric sign. One hooded figure taking his time deciding which chocolate bars to load into his sagging pants can be seen carrying around a rifle. Another masked figure grabbing a handful of loot appears to be an adolescent girl.

    Clerks and paying customers look on in disbelief as the looters pilfer without any fear of consequence.

    The outlet added: “In what appears to have been a coordinated effort, drivers blocked a FedEx truck in the middle of Riverport Road and Mallory Avenue around 8:30 p.m., affording masked men an opportunity to break into the trailer and steal multiple packages.”

    But as scary as this ‘purge’ like behavior is in Memphis (referring to the movies where all crime, including murder, is allowed one day a year), the recent incident in Las Vegas is even worse.

    There a teenage boy, Jonathan Lewis Jr., was brutally beaten to death by 15 teens in broad daylight.

    Video of the brutal attack emerged on social media last week, showing the teen being savagely pummeled as he tried to run away.

    [His father, Jonathan] Lewis Sr. said he believes the deadly onslaught began after “Jonathan stood up for one of his smaller friends,” according to the Las Vegas Review-Journal.

    “A couple (of people) attacked him, and they weren’t able to hurt him enough, and they all attacked him at once,” the dad stated.

    Lewis Sr. remembered his son as a “loving, giving, kind, fierce young man who loved community and caring for others.” He added that “his son was an aspiring artist who was considering joining the military like his grandfather – who served in the U.S. Navy.”

    Another article in The Blaze noted that:

    While the victim’s family tries to process his death, others are puzzling over why this violent episode has not elicited the kind of national response other racially dichotomous incidents have in recent years.

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

    GOP Governors Migrant ‘Stunt’ Working as Dem Mayors Plead for Help

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    5
    via Wikimedia Commons

    ANALYSIS – When Republican governors Ron DeSantis of Florida and Greg Abbott of Texas began busing illegal migrants from their states to deep blue ‘sanctuary’ cities like New York City, Chicago, and Washington, D.C., Democrats, and the establishment media called it a political ‘stunt.’

    Colorado Gov. Jared Polis, a Democrat, leading another state suffering from the same migrant crisis, has also sent migrants from his state to sanctuary cities in recent months.

    Abbott has been the most prolific bussing migrants north. 

    DeSantis sent a couple of busloads to the uber liberal and wealthy enclave of Martha’s Vineyard, the exclusive Massachusetts island that is a regular playground for liberal Hollywood and DC elites.

    The governors want to put the pressure of Joe Biden’s horrendous border and immigration policies on the front stoops of big city Democrat mayors, instead of the backyards of mostly red Republican border states.  

    They also wanted to highlight the issue nationally and emphasize the sheer insanity of the entire sanctuary city concept where illegal aliens are virtually invited to come and stay, safe from federal law enforcement.

    And the governors’ ‘stunt’ appears to be working.

    Both the outgoing mayor of Chicago and the new mayor of NYC are begging for help with the crush of these migrants.

    NYC Mayor Eric Adams, a national surrogate for Biden, has been the most outspoken, recently saying Biden has “failed” his city which is being “destroyed by the migrant crisis.”

    Mayor Lori Lightfoot of Chicago sent a letter to Abbott on Sunday requesting that he stop sending busloads of migrants to the Windy City over what she called political motivations.

    She said the city has been caring for more than 8,000 penniless migrants since the first buses arrived from Texas in August. And the number is growing.

    But Abbott began sending migrant buses to these blue cities in the fall as a response to the surge of migrant crossings at the southern border caused by Bien’s obscene and likely illegal immigration policies. 

    Abbott has said the migrant ‘relocations will continue until the federal government secures the border.

    In her letter, Lightfoot said she is sympathetic to the challenges of border towns in Texas but wrote:

    Chicago is a Welcoming City and we collaborate with County, State, and community partners to rise to this challenge, but your lack of consideration or coordination in an attempt to cause chaos and score political points has resulted in a critical tipping point in our ability to receive individuals and families in a safe, orderly, and dignified way.

    Well, good. Now she can truly be ‘sympathetic’ to the border towns suffering under the stampede of illegal migrants Biden is allowing into the country.

    She added a bunch of other claptrap in her letter blaming Abbott for being heartless and creating a humanitarian crisis, etc.

    Unfortunately, what she totally ignores is that her ‘welcoming’ policies, and those of her party and the president, are the direct cause of the migrant crisis.

    Meanwhile, Politico reports that “Republicans just gained an unlikely ally in their attacks on the president’s immigration policies: the Democratic mayor of New York.”

    Unlike Lightfoot, Adams seems to get it.

    GOP leaders high-fived this month after hearing Mayor Adams say Biden had “failed” the city on immigration and that NYC “is being destroyed by the migrant crisis.”

    In this past year, more than 57,000 migrants have arrived in New York after crossing the southern border. Some were sent from states like Texas, but others arrived on their own.

    City services used to house, feed, educate, and provide health care to newcomers are estimated to cost taxpayers $2.9 billion next year alone.

    This is more than the entire NYC Fire Department operating budget. 

    Adams’ new rhetoric has drawn praise from some Republicans and the conservative editorial page of the New York Post.

    His words have also echoed remarks by Fox News contributor Sean Duffy.

    But not all Republicans are cheering for Adams. Rep. Chip Roy of Texas wasn’t quite ready to applaud the New York mayor.

    Politico continued:

    “Eric Adams is right to blame the Biden Administration for the border crisis, but this is the same guy who campaigned on his city’s sanctuary status and extended childcare, colleague classes and other taxpayer-funded programs to illegal migrants,” Roy said in a statement.

    “Texas has been bearing the brunt of this crisis for over two years — now New York is getting a taste of their own medicine.”

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

    Trump Shifts All Blame to Abortion for Midterm Losses

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    6
    Donald Trump via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    ANALYSIS – In typical Trump fashion, the former president just threw all pro-lifer conservatives under the bus to deflect any blame from himself for the weak ‘Red Trickle’ that was the 2022 election. But is he wrong?

    On November 9, I wrote about how both issues impacted the 2022 election losses. ‘Abortion and Trump tipped the scales.’

    Yes, some pro-life conservatives took the reasonable Supreme Court decision to give abortion decisions back to the states (where they belong), as a green light to push for the most aggressive anti-abortion restrictions they could.

    And this was a mistake. It only reinforced Democrat women’s fears and independent women’s doubts, fueling the abortion rights extremists to rally and independents to waver or vote Democrat.

    What they should have done is defend Dobbs and the Supreme Court while positioning the GOP as the reasonable party on abortion.

    Abortion on demand at all times under any circumstances, until the time of birth (and sometimes even beyond), is the extreme position.

    And most Americans oppose that insanity.

    “Let states decide. The left is extreme on abortion.” That’s how we should have played it.

    Sadly, too many on the right didn’t follow that playbook.

    So, when Trump stated on Truth Social on Sunday that it wasn’t his fault that “Republicans didn’t live up to expectations” in the 2022 midterm elections, he may be partly right.

    Instead, Trump blamed the “abortion issue,” writing that it was “poorly handled by many Republicans, especially those that firmly insisted on No Exceptions, even in the case of Rape, Incest, or Life of the Mother.”

    And that was true. Here I agree with Trump.

    When I ran for office in South Florida 10 years ago, I signed the National Right to Life Pledge, but even that staunchly pro-life organization made exceptions for rape, incest or the life of the mother.

    Now, however, Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, one of the nation’s leading pro-life groups, which spent tens of millions to mobilize the pro-life vote in the 2022 midterms, stated in response to Trump:

    The approach to winning on abortion in federal races, proven for a decade is this: state clearly the ambitious consensus pro-life view on abortion and contrast that with the extreme view of Democrat opponents. We look forward to hearing that position fully articulated by Mr. Trump and all presidential candidates.

    Their response was far from convincing. Taking the most extreme counterpoint to the left’s extreme position doesn’t win votes. It only makes you seem more extreme than the other guys.

    In an interview with Breitbart News last month, Trump said it best: “I think a lot of Republicans didn’t handle the abortion question properly. I think if you don’t have the three exceptions, it’s almost impossible in most parts of the country to win.”

    And even when Republicans were not asking for the most extreme abortion restrictions, the Democrats lied that they were.

    And this was also a failure of the GOP.

    The Democrats and leftist groups spent $468 million on abortion-related advertisements, whereas the Republican party focused its campaign advertising on inflation.

    While some grassroots conservatives were overzealous about rolling back abortion after Dobbs, the GOP establishment was afraid of the abortion issue altogether, ignored it and hoped it would just go away.

    But I think Trump is also wrong to take no blame himself. He did play a big part in the 2022 electoral defeat.

    As I wrote on November 9:

    But beyond the abortion issue, former president Trump likely played an outsized role in the red wave turning to a ripple.

    And as someone who has been a strong Trump supporter and voted for Trump twice, I believe this sentiment [Trump was part of the problem] has validity.

    Continuous ranting about election fraud in 2020 makes the future about the past.

    And forcefully demanding GOP loyalty to one man doesn’t help either.

    It also makes everything about Trump rather than conservative ideas, policies, and candidates.

    Nothing mobilizes the Democrats, the media and the left like Trump.

    Of course, the title of my November piece could have given a clue. It was: “Is It Time for the GOP to Dump Trump?”

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

    Congress Investigating Alleged Biden Attempt To Rig Election For Campaign Supporter

    By
    Donny Ferguson
    -
    2
    Missvain, CC BY 4.0 via Wikimedia Commons

    A congressional committee is now investigating allegations that the Biden White House tried to sway a major workplace unionization vote in favor of the United Auto Workers union bosses.

    U.S. House Education and the Workforce Committee Chairwoman Virginia Foxx (R-NC) “probed senior Biden administration officials for their attempts to sway the outcome of a Mercedes-Benz unionization election,” the Committee announced in a statement

    “In a letter to Jake Sullivan, Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, Chairwoman Foxx is demanding information regarding the Biden administration’s attempts to influence the outcome of a unionization vote at the Mercedes-Benz plant in Vance, Alabama, as voting was underway,” the statement reads.

    The UAW is a major donor and political supporter of Democrats, spending a reported total of $22.64 million on politics in the 2020 election cycle, according to OpenSecrets.

     “On May 17, Mercedes-Benz employees at a plant in Vance, Alabama, voted not to join the United Auto Workers (UAW). In this election, 56 percent of the workers cast their ballots against UAW membership, with more than 90 percent of eligible workers voting in the election. Simultaneously, the UAW became the first U.S. union to file charges using a new German supply chain law. The Committee on Education and the Workforce (Committee) is concerned about recent reports of unusual and inappropriate communications between you and German government officials in what appears to be an attempt to impact the outcome of this election,” Foxx writes in in the letter.

    “On May 6, a news report stated that U.S. government officials had a phone call with German government officials and raised concerns over the Mercedes-Benz representation election in Alabama. … A later report regarding the call also indicated that you prodded Germany to examine the UAW’s allegations against Mercedes-Benz at the direct request of UAW President Shawn Fain. On May 16, the UAW announced that the German government was investigating Mercedes-Benz as a result of charges filed by the UAW in Germany. … It appears the Biden administration, through your actions, sought to put its thumb on the scale to benefit the UAW as the Mercedes-Benz election in Alabama was pending,” Fox continues, adding “It also suggests the UAW sought to use your influence and the White House’s bully pulpit to impact a union representation election.”

    Foxx asked the White House for answers to the following questions:

    Did you raise concerns with German government officials over the Mercedes-Benz representation election in Vance, Alabama, at the request of the UAW?

    In your call with German government officials, did you or any other White House official ask Germany to initiate an investigation of Mercedes-Benz before the Mercedes-Benz union representation election in Alabama concluded?

    Was the purpose of the call with German government officials to discuss the Mercedes-Benz union representation election in Alabama? Were other labor issues or representation elections discussed?

    When did the call with German government officials take place? Provide any White House call logs related to this call.

    Did you discuss your call with German government officials with any employees of the Department of Labor or the NLRB? If so, who?

    Is a local union representation election a national security issue? Why is a local union representation election occupying the time of the U.S. National Security Advisor?

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


    Legal Theorists Try To Attack Trump. Their Argument May Be Dead On Arrival.

    By
    Norman Leahy
    -
    4
    Donald Trump via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    A novel legal theory from two conservative legal scholars published in the University of Pennsylvania Law Review that a section of the 14th Amendment makes Donald Trump ineligible to run for president may be getting a court hearing in Florida.

    As Ballot Access news editor emeritus Richard Winger notes:

    On August 24, a Florida voter, Lawrence Caplan, filed a federal lawsuit seeking to bar former President Donald Trump from being placed on 2024 ballots as a presidential candidate. Caplan v Trump, s.d., 0:23cv-61618.

    Caplan, who appears to be representing himself in the case, writes:

    Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which provides for the disqualification of an individual who commits insurrection against our government has remained on the books for some one hundred and fifty plus years without ever facing question as to its legitimacy. While one can certainly argue that it has not been thoroughly tested, that fact is only because we have not faced an insurrection against our federal government such as the one while we faced on January 6, 2021. It should also be noted that President Trump has since made statements to the effect that should he be elected, he would advocate the total elimination of the US Constitution and the creation of a new charter more in line with his personal values.

    Winger believes Caplan’s suit is “misguided:”

    The Fourteenth Amendment “insurrection clause” bars individuals from being sworn in to certain offices, but it does not bar them from seeking the office. When the Fourteenth Amendment was passed, there was no mechanism to prevent any voter from voting for any candidate.

    Caplan appears to be taking the law review article’s authors, William Baude and Michael Stokes Paulson, at their word:

    “No official should shrink from these duties. It would be wrong — indeed, arguably itself a breach of one’s constitutional oath of office — to abandon one’s responsibilities of faithful interpretation, application, and enforcement of Section Three,” Bode and Paulsen write.

    Alternatively, ordinary citizens could file challenges on the same grounds with state election officials themselves.

    And other such suits may emerge over the coming weeks. I’m not convinced any federal judge will be willing to read Section 3 like Baude and Paulson say it should be. It’s not because the Section’s words aren’t clear – they are.

    My concerns are akin to those of Cato’s Walter Olsen, who writes:

    …no one should assume that just because Baude and Paulsen have made a powerful intellectual case for their originalist reading, that the Supreme Court will declare itself convinced and disqualify Trump. Justice Antonin Scalia memorably described himself as a “faint‐​hearted originalist,” which captures something important about the thinking of almost every Justice—if overruling a wrongly decided old case threatens to disrupt settled expectations to the point of spreading chaos and grief through society, most of them will refrain. Stare decisis, and a general preference for continuity in law, still matters.

    Exactly. While some judges may nurse images of themselves as bold crusaders for justice, most jurists aren’t eager to upset established practice and precedent on a whim. Though, to be fair to the times when such upsets have occurred – Brown v. Board of Education, for example, or Griswold v. Connecticut – have been warranted, necessary, and beneficial.

    Does that apply in the Caplan case? A court will decide. But as I’ve long said about Trump, the only court he cares about is public opinion. If voters reject him, that will carry more weight and sanction than any court could ever deliver.

    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. Republished with permission.

    123...40Page 1 of 40
    © Great America News Desk 2022