Liberal Hollywood can’t believe it.
While most of Hollywood openly steers away from religion-especially Christianity one film is soaring up the box office charts.
Watch Amanda explain the latest situation below:
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
America is waiting…
When will Florida Governor Ron DeSantis officially throw his hat into the ring for the 2024 Republican nomination? Sources close to the governor are spilling the beans…
Watch Amanda explain the situation below:
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
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.
ANALYSIS – Former President Donald Trump faces a slew of legal onslaughts, the latest being a federal indictment by Joe Biden’s Department of Justice (DOJ) for violating the Espionage Act by mishandling classified information.
Like the FBI raid on his Florida home, this divisive and politically charged indictment is an unprecedented development that makes him the first former president in U.S. history to face criminal charges by the federal government.
And the political fallout will be huge.
Trump denies any wrongdoing and is calling the indictments a witch hunt. And yes, he has been unfairly targeted before – many times.
But is this case really part of that same anti-Trump vendetta? And does it matter?
The latest indictment is for the willful retention of highly classified national security documents at his Florida Mar-a-Lago estate, corruptly concealing documents, conspiracy to obstruct justice, and making false statements.
Many will point to the later discovery of classified documents in Joe Biden’s homes and properties connected to him without him facing criminal charges (yet) as proof that this is an anti-Trump witch hunt.
Last week, the DOJ also cleared former Vice President Mike Pence of any wrongdoing after a small number of classified documents were found at his Indiana home in January.
Trump posted a slew of angry social media posts against federal investigators Tuesday highlighting different treatment.
“The Marxists and Fascists in the DOJ & FBI are going after me at a level and speed never seen before in our Country, and I did nothing wrong,” Trump wrote in one of several posts.
And yes, as I have repeatedly written about, the DOJ and the FBI have been heavily politicized, or even weaponized against conservatives.
But, as with Richard Nixon and Watergate, the problem for Trump here is the cover-up. Had he simply returned the documents once they were discovered, it would have been far less likely he would have been indicted.
Instead, Trump repeatedly refused to turn over the materials to federal officials once he left the White House, and then provided a series of bizarre justifications for his actions, before the FBI raided his home.
A separate special counsel is investigating Biden’s handling of classified material after documents were found at his Wilmington, Del., home and a Washington, D.C., office from his time as vice president.
The difference here is Biden’s team alerted federal officials upon discovering the documents and promptly turned them over.
Trump’s own former Attorney General Bill Barr pushed back on Trump’s claims that a special counsel’s ongoing documents probe is politically motivated.
As reported by The Hill:
“Over time, people will see that this is not a case of the Department of Justice conducting a witch hunt,” Barr said in an interview on CBS on Tuesday. “In fact, they approached this very delicately and with deference to the president, and this would have gone nowhere had the president just returned the documents. But he jerked them around for a year and a half.”
The indictment carries serious legal consequences, including the possibility of prison if he’s convicted. Trump will appear at a federal courthouse in Miami on June 13.
In March, the notoriously liberal, Soros-backed Manhattan district attorney, Alvin Bragg, indicted Trump on state charges related to hush-money payments to a former porn film star in 2016.
That local indictment appears far more political and ‘Trumped-up’ (pun not intended) than this federal one. The trial for this case begins in March 2024.
Jack Smith, the special counsel coordinating federal investigations into the Espionage Act indictments, oversees other inquiries related to Trump, including those regarding the Capitol Riot on January 6, 2021.
But none of this will prevent Trump from continuing his campaign for president. “Nothing stops Trump from running while indicted, or even convicted,” University of California, Los Angeles law professor Richard Hasen told CNN.
The Constitution requires only three things of candidates. They must be a natural-born citizen (not a naturalized one), at least 35 years old, and residents of the U.S. for at least 14 years.
So theoretically, Trump could be convicted and still be elected President.
Not only won’t this keep Trump from running, but it will probably help him with his core base of supporters in the GOP primary.
And Trump won’t even go to trial for any of this until well into the next presidential term.
But the optics and politics of all this is the biggest issue.
As the Daily Caller reported Pence as saying: “I think this is going to be terribly divisive for the country. I also think it sends a terrible message to the wider world that looks at America as a standard of not only democracy, but of justice.”
The question is when does all of this come to a head? And what will happen when it does?
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm should be removed from her position amid a “litany” of alleged ethics violations, a group of conservative leaders report.
More than a dozen conservative leaders, including Media Research Center President Brent Bozell, sent a letter to President Joe Biden requesting Granholm’s resignation “based on a series of violations of federal ethics laws and regulations,” the MRC reports.
“In light of the repeated ethical lapses, as well as the apparent tolerance of a lax culture of ethical compliance at the Department of Energy, it is crucial for ensuring the trust of the American people that Secretary Granholm be immediately relieved of her duties,” the letter to Biden states.
The letter lists a “litany of abuses of public trust,” including:
Failure to accurately report financial holdings
Participating personally and substantially in matters directly benefiting a company in which she had a financial interest
Inappropriately using her official position to promote products for multiple companies in which she had a financial interest or covered relationship
Abusing her position of authority and misusing government resources to advance partisan activities in violation of the Hatch Act
Signaling to career civil servants and senior political leadership under her command that policy objectives take priority over basic compliance with ethics and legal obligations.
The letter also accuses Granholm of using her office to boost the value of her stock in Ford Motor Company.
“The recent revelations about Secretary Granholm’s continued financial ownership of Ford stock while acting to enrich – and at times even publicly endorse – the company is egregious,” the letter read. “However, it is simply the latest incident evidencing recklessness at best and intentional disregard for the law at worst.”
The leaders also demand Granholm’s resignation for engaging in prohibited partisan political activity noting the Office of the Special Counsel found Granholm violated the Hatch Act, which prohibits government employees from using their positions to engage in some forms of political activity, in an October 2021 interview.
“Taken together, these episodes cast serious doubt on the Secretary’s fitness to hold a cabinet seat,” the letter reads.
“You often speak of maintaining the highest standards for your administration’s appointees. It is past time that you demonstrate that this promise holds some meaning,” the letter concludes.
Granholm would not the first Biden administration Energy Department official to resign in disgrace.
Former Acting Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Kelly Speakes-Backman amid allegations she used her office to benefit a former employer.
Senior DOE official Samuel Brinton was also fired and later arrested for stealing womens’ luggage from airports.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – ‘Gold Star’ families of U.S. troops killed in the August 2021 Abbey Gate bombing at the Kabul airport in Afghanistan, are blasting Team Biden excuses over the disastrous retreat. Saturday marked the two-year anniversary of the terrorist attack during Joe Biden’s chaotic withdrawal from the country.
At least 183 people were killed in the attack, including the 13 U.S. service members (12 Marines and a sailor).
Shamefully, Biden allowed the Taliban to retake the country almost 20 years to the day of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on Washington, DC, and New York City.
AND HERE, TWO YEARS AFTER THE AFGHAN COLLAPSE, WE STILL DON’T HAVE ANSWERS, AND NO ONE HAS BEEN HELD ACCOUNTABLE.
As I wrote about earlier, senior Biden defense officials spent the days before and after the deadly 2021 attack in Kabul obsessing on getting Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin to sign off on their Climate Change plan rather than focus on the chaos and death in Afghanistan.
Now, several of these Gold Star families spoke at a House Foreign Affairs Committee roundtable where they expressed their anger at the Biden administration, including Chairman of the Chiefs Mark Milley, who they blame, in part, for the bombing that killed 13 service members.
As the hearing was about to commence, Milley released a statement in which he said the U.S. owes Gold Star families “everything.”
“We owe them transparency, we owe them honesty, we owe them accountability. We owe them the truth about what happened to their loved ones,” Milley said.
But the families didn’t appear impressed. Instead, they were angry about the “excuses” and misinformation they received.
Fox News reported on their justified anger and venting. Kelly Barnett, the mother of Marine Corps Staff Sergeant Taylor Hoover, said “I don’t want to hear lies, I don’t want to hear excuses from Joe Biden, from the administration.”
Hoover’s father, Darin Hoover, called on top Pentagon brass to resign.
He poignantly noted: “Today is the date, two years ago, that we received our kids home at Dover. Two years ago today, where we were disrespected with stories of Biden’s son and him looking at his watch. And today, here we sit as their families, begging you two years later, to find these answers.”
Christy Shamblin, mother-in-law of Marine Corps Sergeant Nicole Gee, who was pictured prominently with an Afghan baby in her arms prior to her death, asked why credible warnings were ignored in the days leading up to the attack.
Some even accused the Pentagon of giving them ‘made-up stories’ about their loved ones in the aftermath of the attack.
As Breitbart News reported:
…[in a Fox interview] Cheryl Rex, whose son, Lance Corporal Dylan Merola, was killed in the Kabul airport attack in 2021 reacted to Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Mark Milley saying that he believes military briefers gave all the information to the families of those killed in the bombing all the information they could by stating that the briefing on her son was completely inaccurate…
…[When Rex was asked] “Do you believe that all the information was there, or do you agree with other families that it wasn’t about the information, it was about the warnings that were ignored?”
Rex answered, “Me personally, he did not — the brief report was not correct. They changed my son’s location a couple of times. They were trying to accommodate his wounds that were not even in the right spots of his body according to his autopsy report. He did not — the brief report is nothing [like] what we were actually told… I feel it was made-up stories that they were trying to cover up the wounds.”
These Gold Star families deserve answers and accountability. And so do the American people.
Go woke, go broke…
Watch Amanda explain the situation below:
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
In a controversial decision that critics say undermines basic electoral integrity, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly issued a preliminary injunction Thursday blocking the Trump administration from implementing key provisions of its election reform order — including a requirement that individuals provide proof of citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections.
The Trump administration’s order, signed in March, sought to address the widespread public concern over election security by aligning U.S. registration standards with those used by many developed nations — where proof of citizenship is a basic requirement to cast a vote. Yet, in her ruling, Judge Kollar-Kotelly sided with Democratic operatives and partisan groups, granting their request to halt implementation of what should be a commonsense safeguard.
It’s already a felony for noncitizens to vote in federal elections. So why oppose a mechanism to verify that voters are, in fact, eligible citizens? The administration’s proposed policy simply sought to enforce existing law, not change it. But for activists and partisan lawyers, that’s apparently too much.
Critics of the ruling argue that it demonstrates a disturbing disconnect between legal theory and electoral reality. While the plaintiffs claimed the executive order infringes on the “Elections Clause” of the Constitution — which delegates much of the authority over elections to the states — the Trump order targeted the federal voter registration form, which is a product of federal law and administered by a federal agency.
Among the more absurd arguments presented during the case was the suggestion that requiring proof of citizenship would complicate voter registration drives at grocery stores and public venues. In other words, ensuring that only citizens vote is too inconvenient for activists looking to register voters en masse.
But this framing reveals the central issue: voter registration is being treated like a political campaign tactic, not a civic responsibility. If accuracy and integrity are seen as barriers to convenience, something is deeply wrong with the system.
If the courts won’t even allow the federal form to be updated to reflect current law, critics argue, how can Americans have confidence that elections are fair and secure?
Ironically, while liberal groups celebrate the decision as a “victory for voters,” many Americans see it as a victory for loopholes and ambiguity. The same people who insist elections are sacred and democracy is under threat are now openly opposing the most basic eligibility checks used around the world.
Meanwhile, Trump’s other proposed reforms — including tighter mail ballot deadlines and review of voter rolls against immigration databases — were allowed to stand. But with the citizenship requirement blocked, many worry that the core vulnerability in the system remains unaddressed.
When noncitizens can easily register to vote — intentionally or accidentally — and the federal government is barred from checking, who exactly benefits?
This article originally appeared on American Liberty News. The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk. It is republished with permission.
READ NEXT: President Trump Signs Executive Order Requiring Proof Of Citizenship To Vote In Federal Elections
A new Biden administration proposal to hike mortgage payments for Americans with good credit, to subsidize loans for people with bad credit, is running into opposition to Congress.
But is it enough to stop Biden?
The U.S. House of Representatives unanimously passed an amendment from Congresswoman Lauren Boebert (R-CO) “requiring the Government Accountability Office to publish a report on its website exposing the costs and process associated with the Biden administration’s socialist housing policies,” a statement Boebert reports.
The amendment “will help protect homeowners from Biden’s disastrous scheme to raise fees for people with higher credit scores to subsidize those with lower credit scores,” says Boebert.
“(O)n a $400,000 mortgage, a borrower with a credit score of 680 would be forced to pay $40 more per month to subsidize similar borrowers with worse credit scores,” Boebert reports.
“Joe Biden’s decision to subsidize failure makes more sense when you realize he’s hired Mayor Pete, Karine Jean-Pierre, and Kamala Harris. Raising housing fees at a time when mortgage rates are at the highest level in years thanks to the Biden-Pelosi spending spree will make housing less affordable and result in higher mortgage costs and reduced access to credit for most borrowers who are working hard and doing their best to just get by,” says Boebert.
“My commonsense amendment provides transparency for the American people and exposes the costs and arbitrary processes used by Biden’s minions to ram through his socialist housing policy that penalizes responsible homeowners to subsidize high-risk individuals,” says Boebert.
“Unelected bureaucrats in Washington should not have the ability to impose these un-American regulations on hardworking middle-class families,” Boebert adds.
“This is a gross overreach and will ultimately exacerbate the growing inflation problem we have in this country,” Boebert concludes.
Boebert’s amendment “requires the Government Accountability Office to publish a report on its website and publicly disclose to the American people any costs and the process utilized by the FHFA to unilaterally change Loan Level Pricing Adjustment (LLPA) fees and implement Biden’s unfair, socialist housing policy changes,” her office reports.
Boebert’s amendment to Congressman Warren Davidson’s Middle-Class Borrower Protection Act was approved by the House in a unanimous voice vote.
The amended bill passed the House by a 230-189 vote and now goes to the Senate.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
The other Soros: Senator Reveals How this Liberal Swiss Billionaire Has Been Funneling Cash into US Elections
A left-wing Swiss billionaire has been bankrolling the voting systems used in American elections, with an alleged bias toward liberals, a U.S. senator reveals.
United States Senator Bill Hagerty (R-TN), a member of the Senate Rules Committee, pressed Benjamin Hovland, Vice Chair of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC), on foreign influence in U.S. elections through what he called “a new form of Zuckerbucks: partisan, foreign-backed funding for local election administrators through the U.S. Alliance for Election Excellence.”
Hagerty calls it a “highly problematic scheme in which left-wing organizations provide substantial, foreign-funded resources for conducting American elections at the local level.”
Much of the funding comes from Hansjörg Wyss, a Swiss billionaire and multi-million dollar donor to left-wing causes through his “Hub Project.”
“This is an $80 million initiative, funded by a web of left-wing entities, to ‘help’ local election administrators conduct elections,” Hagerty explained. “It’s a new form of ‘Zuckerbucks,’ is what it is. This network of entities has received tens—if not hundreds—of millions of dollars from a foreign left-wing billionaire named Hansjörg Wyss. He’s not a U.S. Citizen, so he can’t contribute directly to our elections, but he’s found a way to be involved in our elections.”
“After being repeatedly pressed by Hagerty to acknowledge whether foreign donations used to conduct American elections are acceptable, Vice Chair Hovland conceded that this interference is inappropriate,” a statement from Hagerty’s office reveals.
“Absolutely not. Of course not,” Vice Chair Hovland answered.
“I want to be clear with that because what this is is Zuckerbucks 2.0 coming from a foreign billionaire involving themselves in our elections. What I want to make certain is that this Commission—that no Election Assistance Commission dollars are commingled in any way with these foreign funds,” said Hagerty.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.