Opinion

Home Opinion

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

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.

Election Expert Calls On Biden To Immediately Resign

Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

Does Joe Biden have any friends left?

Expert election prognosticator and FiveThirtyEight founder Nate Silver called on President Biden to immediately resign and let Vice President Kamala Harris carry out the remainder of his term.

Silver’s argument came in response to a Washington Post article about Biden’s recent trip to Brazil that began like this:

MANAUS, Brazil — President Joe Biden was in the middle of the Amazon rainforest, unprotected from mosquitoes, fire ants and loud, squawking macaws. But there was another pest he did manage to avoid: the pack of reporters traveling with him.

For a short speech in front of about two dozen people, the journalists were initially instructed to watch Biden on a flat-screen television placed amid sand and lush trees as the president spoke about 50 feet away, though they were eventually moved closer. As Biden finished his remarks, maracas rattled by a local group prevented him from hearing reporters’ shouted questions about Ukraine.

During a six-day foreign trip to Peru and Brazil that wrapped up Monday, the president rarely spoke in public, answering almost no questions despite repeated efforts to engage him. One television producer took to writing messages on a large pad of paper, holding it up as Biden boarded and departed Air Force One.

The story went on to note that Biden has been conspicuously quiet about the results of the 2024 presidential election, which he “repeatedly called the most important election in history” and  “warned would change the country forever if [Donald] Trump prevailed.”

Silver was unamused by Biden’s performance as described by the Post.

“Is there any particular reason to assume Biden is competent to be president right now?” he asked rhetorically on X. “It’s a very difficult job. It’s a dangerous world. Extremely high-stakes decisions in Ukraine. He should resign and let Harris serve out the last 2 months.”

Amanda Head: Raise The Voting Age? This Poll Indicates Yes!

2
Amanda Head

Could it be time to amend the U.S. Constitution?

Watch Amanda explain the situation below:

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

McCarthy Tells GOP Opponents to ‘File the F*cking Motion’ to Remove Him

7
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy delivers remarks at the 2021 Capitol Christmas Tree lighting ceremony in Washington DC, December 1, 2021. USDA Forest Service photo by Tanya E. Flores.

ANALYSIS – Some of the Republican Party’s more ‘firebrand’ conservatives are trying to bully and threaten House Speaker Kevin McCarthy. Many in the media have tried to paint the battle in ways that discredit the GOP. 

I support vibrant debate within our party, but constantly undermining the leadership when the GOP has a slim majority is getting old. And McCarthy is clearly getting sick of it too.

Florida Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz bashed McCarthy on Tuesday, giving him a list of demands while threatening a motion for McCarthy to vacate the chair, essentially to remove him as Speaker.

This came just after McCarthy announced the Republican Party will move forward with an impeachment inquiry into Biden. However, Gaetz said that is not enough.

The Daily Caller reported:

“Now moments ago, Speaker McCarthy endorsed an impeachment inquiry. This is a baby step following weeks of pressure from House conservatives to do more. We must move faster. Now I will concede that the votes I have called for will likely fail. Term limits, balanced budgets, maybe even impeachment. I am prepared for that eventuality because at least if we take votes the American people get to see who’s fighting for them and who’s willing to tolerate more corruption and business as usual,” he said. 

This all sounds good, but Gaetz seems to admit that it’s all more show than substance. The votes aren’t here. The GOP barely controls the House, and Gaetz is just posturing like he usually does.

So, McCarthy did something I highly respect. He told Gaetz and his allies: “If you want to file the motion,” adding: “File the fucking motion.”

Enough with the petty posturing, Gaetz. Work with the leadership to get real things done, and hopefully gain seats in 2024 to get more done.

The House GOP was expected to vote on the impeachment inquiry, but McCarthy did not mention a vote to move forward with the inquiry. This follows the precedent set by then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi during the first Trump impeachment in 2019.

The Daily Caller noted that:

The speaker said he now believes there is enough evidence stemming from the House Judiciary Committee and House Oversight Committee to move forward with an impeachment inquiry into the president.

McCarthy said in July that an impeachment inquiry would help Republicans better access documents detailing alleged misconduct from government officials benefiting Hunter Biden. Conference Chairwoman Elise Stefanik has endorsed McCarthy’s’ position, which Democrats adopted in 2019 during former President Donald Trump’s first impeachment.

Asked Tuesday whether he was being hypocritical, McCarthy referred back to Pelosi: “I’m not, because she changed the precedent,” reported The Hill.

“I warned her not to do it that way in the process. And that’s what she did; that’s what we did,” McCarthy said.

As The Hill further noted:

Moving forward on an inquiry without a vote allows swift action on a priority for conservatives who have been pressuring the House Speaker. McCarthy’s decision also protects moderates — particularly those who represent districts President Biden won in 2020 — from having to take a tough vote. 

What McCarthy is doing is real and will be able to succeed. Let him get on with it, or “file the f*cking motion.”

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

Links to China? FBI Must Search All Biden Homes for Classified Materials

7
Federal Bureau of Investigation, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

ANALYSIS – While the Donald Trump classified documents saga is embarrassing in its own right, it appears to be more ego related than anything else. 

Trump thought he could take them, and he did – a lot of them.

Not so with Joe Biden’s similar saga, which, while it involves less volume, could involve his son Hunter Biden and Communist China.

While in no way excusing him, Trump doesn’t seem to have had any other motive than ego.

That doesn’t change the potential damage to national security they may have caused. 

However, despite unhinged partisan commentary at the saga’s outset speculating that Trump was selling these documents to foreigners, it appears there was absolutely no truth to that nonsense whatsoever.

While an Intelligence Community (IC) damage assessment is ongoing, as it is with Joe Biden’s unsecured classified documents, and now Mike Pence’s as well, there is no reporting of anything being compromised by Trump.

At least not yet.

Meanwhile, Biden’s mishandling of highly classified documents brings more realistic speculation and concerns, especially due to Hunter Biden’s potential access to these documents and his close ties to the Chinese communist regime.

This is why Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) is now asking that the FBI search all locations, residences and offices Hunter has used or is now using.

I would add that the same be done for all homes and offices used by Joe Biden as well, especially his Rehoboth beach house. 

The FBI’s failure to search that beach house borders on criminal negligence and professional malpractice.

But back to Hunter.

As Newsmax reported:

“It seems he [President Biden] leaves classified documents wherever he goes. And we also know that Hunter Biden at times was — declared his residence to be those very same places,” Cruz said on Fox News Channel’s “Sunday Morning Futures.”

“I also believe it is critical for the FBI to search Hunter Biden’s homes, home and office residences to make sure there are no classified documents there, given all the evidence that’s piling up. We need to ascertain who’s had access to what and when.”

Cruz also was asked about an email allegedly written by Hunter Biden to a business partner that contained information about Ukraine seemingly taken directly from classified information given to senators before they travel overseas.

“Well, the one thing we know for sure is Hunter Biden didn’t write that. Hunter Biden is not an expert on Ukraine, he’s not an expert on Eastern Europe, he’s not an expert on Russia, but that email did help get him on the board of Burisma,” Cruz said. “It did help him get paid $83,000 a month because it showed a level of expertise, not coming from him, but he got it somewhere.”

While the wild speculation aimed at Trump selling secrets to the highest bidder was pure left-wing ranting, and some residual Russia collusion delusion, the concerns about Joe and Hunter, and dangerous liaisons with China appear more grounded in facts and evidence.

Hunter had intimate business relations with agents of the Chinese regime, and access to all the locations Joe may have stashed highly classified documents. 

It’s not a stretch to see the links and risk.

It is time the FBI searches all Biden homes and offices, including everywhere Hunter has been, and Joe Biden’s beach house. 

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

Judge Judy Labels Trump Hush Money Case ‘Nonsense’

2
Donald Trump via Gage Skidmore Flickr

A waste of time and taxpayer dollars…

“Judge Judy” Sheindlin called Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s (D) hush money case against former President Trump “nonsense” in a recent interview.

“You gotta twist yourself into a pretzel to figure out what the crime was. [Bragg] doesn’t like him — New York City didn’t like him for a while,” Sheindlin said of Trump in a “Who’s Talking to Chris Wallace?” interview streaming Friday on Max.

“I would be happier, as someone who owns property in Manhattan, if the district attorney of New York County would take care of criminals who were making it impossible for citizens to walk in the streets and use the subway, to use his efforts to keep those people off the street, than to spend $5 million or $10 million of taxpayers’ money trying Donald Trump on this nonsense,” the longtime TV judge told Wallace.

Watch:

“I, as a taxpayer in this country, resent using the system for your own personal self-aggrandizement,” the “Judy Justice” personality said of Bragg.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

Asked by the CNN anchor what she thought of Trump, the 81-year-old former Manhattan Family Court judge replied, “I think he was a good businessman, a real estate guy. And he was certainly terrific on ‘The Apprentice.’”

The celebrity judge’s comments come as the Manhattan DA seeks an extension of the restraining order against former President Donald Trump. (RELATED: Manhattan DA Seeks Extended Gag Order Against Trump Amid Death Threats To Bragg)

They argue that Trump’s public statements have increased tensions and led to threats against Bragg and his team before Trump’s July 11 sentencing.

The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office charged Trump with 34 counts of falsifying business records as part of a hush-money scheme to prevent porn star Stormy Daniels from speaking out about her alleged extramarital affair before the 2016 presidential election.

Before Trump, no sitting or former president ever faced criminal charges. This is the lowest level felony in New York, any potential sentence will more than likely be served after the 2024 election.

As The New York Times reports:

The order, issued before Mr. Trump’s Manhattan criminal trial began in mid-April, bars him from attacking witnesses, jurors, court staff and relatives of the judge who presided over the trial, Juan M. Merchan.

Mr. Trump’s lawyers have sought to have the order lifted since Mr. Trump’s conviction in late May. But in a 19-page filing on Friday, prosecutors argued that while Justice Merchan no longer needed to enforce the portion of the gag order relating to trial witnesses, he should keep in place the provisions protecting jurors, prosecutors, court staff and their families.

Article Published With The Permission of American Liberty News

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

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.

Amanda Head: Who’s Your Pick For 2024 – Trump or DeSantis?

6

As Americans continue to wait for official midterm results to trickle in Republicans are already diving themselves into two camps: Ron DeSantis or Donald Trump.

Who are you siding with?

Watch Amanda break it down below.

Amanda Head: Trump Compared to Tupac…What?

1

Did you ever think that former President Donald Trump and infamous rapper Tupac would be compared to one another?

Watch Amanda explain the latest developments below:

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

GOP Leaders Fund Anti-Freedom Caucus Primary Candidates

2
Ted Eytan from Washington, DC, USA, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

In the quiet corridors of Republican power, something unprecedented is happening. For decades, party leadership maintained a mostly unspoken, but deeply respected ethic: do not intervene in open-seat primaries, especially in safely Republican districts. Let the voters decide. Let the grassroots rise. Let the contest unfold without the heavy thumb of Washington tipping the scale. This was not merely tradition. It was a matter of trust, a recognition that voters, not donors, not operatives, not Majority Whips, should choose the next Republican standard-bearer. Today, that ethic is being cast aside.

The stage is Arizona’s 5th Congressional District, a deep-red seat held by House Freedom Caucus (HFC) stalwart Andy Biggs, who is stepping down to pursue the governorship. Historically, this would be the moment for conservative insurgents to rise, for HFC allies to present their case to voters without interference from party brass. Instead, what we are witnessing is an unmistakable effort by House Republican leadership to erase one of the Freedom Caucus’s most reliable seats.

Three separate leadership PACs have now contributed directly to Jay Feely, a former NFL kicker and establishment-favored Republican who is not aligned with the Freedom Caucus. Majority Whip Tom Emmer’s “Electing Majority Making Effective Republicans” PAC gave $5,000. NRCC Chair Richard Hudson’s “First in Freedom PAC” gave $2,500. And Rep. Juan Ciscomani, of neighboring AZ-6, added $1,000 from his own “Defending the American Dream PAC.” These are not idle contributions. They are targeted, strategic, and meant to shape the outcome of a race that should have been left to the people.

Only one candidate in the race, Daniel Keenan, a local home builder, has pledged to join the Freedom Caucus. His candidacy represents continuity with Biggs’s conservative legacy. Feely’s candidacy, by contrast, is backed by leadership precisely because it promises rupture. That is the point. The goal here is not merely to elect a Republican, but to deny the seat to the Freedom Caucus entirely.

To grasp the seriousness of this act, one must understand just how rare it is. Leadership PACs, particularly those operated by high-ranking figures like the Majority Whip and NRCC Chair, have historically stayed neutral in Republican primaries unless protecting incumbents. This was not a legal requirement, but a moral one. Rick Scott, as NRSC chair, was emphatic on this point during his tenure: “We should remain neutral in primaries, except in the cases of GOP incumbents. The voters will decide.”

In fact, neutrality in safe-seat primaries was such a bedrock value that during the contentious 2023 Speaker’s race, conservative holdouts demanded that Kevin McCarthy enshrine it in writing. The Congressional Leadership Fund (CLF), the House GOP’s main super PAC aligned with McCarthy, publicly promised not to interfere in open safe Republican primaries. CLF president Dan Conston declared, “CLF will not spend in any open-seat primaries in safe Republican districts, and CLF will not grant resources to other super PACs to do so.” That promise secured enough support for McCarthy to win the gavel. It was a recognition that such meddling would constitute a betrayal.

And yet, here we are, watching as Emmer, Hudson, and Ciscomani appear to do precisely what CLF promised not to do. They are not spending millions, but the act is significant because of who they are and what it signals. A whisper from the Majority Whip carries weight. A nod from the NRCC chair is not an idle gesture. Their PAC money announces a clear intention: the Republican Party must no longer accommodate the Freedom Caucus.

To call this behavior unethical is not hyperbole. The entire point of leadership PACs is to strengthen the party against Democrats, not to wage civil war within it. Donors to these PACs do not expect their money to be used to sandbag fellow Republicans who happen to believe in a stricter reading of the Constitution, in tighter budgets, in actually following the rules. They expect their money to be used to expand the majority, not to hollow it out ideologically.

This is why even modest interventions like these cause such a stir. They are not just financial acts, but symbolic declarations. They say to the conservative base, “You are not welcome here.” They say to the House Freedom Caucus, “You will be replaced.” They signal that what was once an uneasy coalition is now an open conflict.

There is precedent, to be sure, but not encouraging one. In 2016, Freedom Caucus member Rep. Tim Huelskamp was defeated in his Kansas primary after outside money flooded the race. It was widely seen as retaliation for his opposition to then-Speaker John Boehner. The establishment, furious at Huelskamp’s independence, funded a challenger, Roger Marshall, who went on to win. At the time, that maneuver was shocking. Paul Gosar, another HFC member, remarked, “The Freedom Caucus hasn’t challenged sitting members. We’ve only played in open seats. But isn’t it interesting that K Street and Wall Street are playing against our members?”

Now, that behavior is becoming institutional. The NRCC chair and the Majority Whip are no longer merely allowing such intervention, they are directing it. The shift is profound. It marks a move from tolerating intra-party dissent to crushing it.

What changed? The rise of the Freedom Caucus has been a source of anxiety for establishment Republicans ever since its inception. But with the return of Donald Trump to the presidency in 2025 and the growing alignment between the Freedom Caucus and the MAGA base, that anxiety has morphed into fear. The Freedom Caucus has shown it can shape leadership elections, influence appropriations bills, and demand accountability. It is no longer a fringe. It is a force. And that makes it a target.

Trump himself has called Tom Emmer a “RINO” and opposed his speakership bid. Hudson and Ciscomani have similarly earned the ire of MAGA-aligned voters for their votes on spending bills and procedural maneuvers seen as too accommodating to Democrats. The leadership PAC donations in Arizona’s 5th are not just about that race. They are part of a larger strategy to neutralize the most vocal advocates of the America First agenda.

None of this is illegal. But neither is it wise. When party leadership abandons neutrality, it sends a message to grassroots conservatives: your vote does not count unless we approve of your candidate. That message corrodes trust. It demoralizes volunteers. It severs the organic connection between representative and represented. It replaces the republican with the oligarchic.

The party should not fear its conservative wing. It should listen to it. If leadership believes Freedom Caucus members are too extreme, they should make that argument on the merits, in public, and with courage. They should not attempt to buy the outcome behind closed doors with PAC money. That is not persuasion. That is manipulation.

What is unfolding in Arizona’s 5th is not just a local race. It is a test case. If leadership succeeds in deleting a Freedom Caucus seat here, others will follow. More PAC money will flow. More loyal conservatives will be boxed out before the voters even speak. The House Freedom Caucus will be diminished, not by debate or democracy, but by design.

This is not the path to unity. It is the road to irrelevance. The Republican Party must decide whether it wishes to be a big tent or a closed club. If the answer is the latter, it should at least have the honesty to admit it.

If you enjoy my work, please consider subscribing https://x.com/amuse.

Sponsored by the John Milton Freedom Foundation, a nonprofit dedicated to helping independent journalists overcome formidable challenges in today’s media landscape and bring crucial stories to you.

.