Capitol Hill is in a frenzy over the latest debt deal reached between lawmakers.
Watch Amanda explain the situation below:
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – In the immediate wake of one of the most horrifying terror attacks ever filmed, a coalition of 34 leftist Harvard student groups stupidly and offensively circulated a letter that stated that they “hold the Israeli regime entirely responsible for all unfolding violence.”
This, as stomach-churning images, and reports surfaced hourly of the vile murders and atrocities committed by the Hamas jihadists against over 1,000 Israeli civilians, entire families, children, even babies.
Not to mention over 25 Americans were killed and scores kidnapped.
Well, this time, things didn’t go as planned for the lefty Ivy League students accustomed to being coddled by woke corporate executives.
The response from Wall Street leaders, and soon other titans of corporate America was swift.
Bill Ackman the billionaire founder and CEO of hedge fund giant Pershing Square Capital Management, wrote on his X social media account on Tuesday:
I have been asked by a number of CEOs if Harvard would release a list of the members of each of the Harvard organizations that have issued the letter assigning sole responsibility for Hamas’ heinous acts to Israel, so as to insure [sic] that none of us inadvertently hire any of their members.
“If, in fact, their members support the letter they have released, the names of the signatories should be made public so their views are publicly known.”
Ackman, a Harvard grad worth $3.5 billion, added: “One should not be able to hide behind a corporate shield when issuing statements supporting the actions of terrorists, who, we now learn, have beheaded babies, among other inconceivably despicable acts.”
Soon, other CEOs were joining him.
Jonathan Newman, CEO of salad chain Sweetgreen, quickly seconded Ackman in urging that the signatories of the letter be banned from future employment.
“I would like to know so I know never to hire these people,” Newman wrote in response to Ackman’s post on X, formerly Twitter, on Tuesday.
“Same,” David Duel, CEO of health care services firm EasyHealth, wrote in response to Newman.
Many other executives posted agreement with Ackman, such as Stephen Ready, CEO of marketing firm Inspired who posted “this is a must” and Michael Broukhim, CEO of FabFitFun, who said to Ackman: “We are in as well.”
Meanwhile, as The New York Post reported, others signaled their approval of his post with a supportive emoji or a gesture of agreement. These included: Hu Montague, founder, and vice president of construction company Diligent; Art Levy, head of strategy at payments platform Brex; and Jake Wurzak, the CEO of hospitality group Dovehill Capital Management.
The Post added that after the online fusillade from so many potential future employers, many of the spineless lefties responsible for the letter quickly ran for the hills.
“The backlash and possible blacklisting has led to a flurry of backpedaling by four of the initial student organizations attached to the inflammatory statement — while board members of other groups have quit in an effort to distance themselves.”
Amnesty International at Harvard, Harvard College Act on a Dream, the Harvard Undergraduate Nepali Student Association, the Harvard Islamic Society, and Harvard Undergraduate Ghungroo, are among the groups that have since recanted according to the Harvard Crimson.
In fairness, many organizations didn’t know one of their representatives had signed on the group’s behalf.
To Harvard’s credit, many other student groups and faculty expressed outrage at the letter, and their fellow students and colleagues.
According to the campus paper, at least 17 other Harvard groups have joined 500 faculty and staff and 3,000 others in signing a counterstatement attacking the other groups’ letter as “completely wrong and deeply offensive.”
This was followed by 160 faculty members bashing Harvard’s response to the scandal, writing in their own separate letter that it “can be seen as nothing less than condoning the mass murder of civilians based only on their nationality.”
Its good to see that some at Harvard still have common sense as well as decency and humanity. Its also good to see corporate America responding in the way it has to these snively terror enabling leftist college students and staff.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
Matt Whitaker hosts prominent Trump adviser Kash Patel on Liberty & Justice.
Per Matt Whitaker:
Kash Patel is an American attorney, children’s book author and former government official. He served as chief of staff to the Acting United States Secretary of Defense under President Donald Trump.
Matthew G. Whitaker was acting Attorney General of the United States (2018-2019). Prior to becoming acting Attorney General, Mr. Whitaker served as Chief of Staff to the Attorney General. He was appointed as the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Iowa by President George W. Bush, serving from 2004-2009. Whitaker was the managing partner of Des Moines-based law firm, Whitaker Hagenow & Gustoff LLP from 2009 until rejoining DOJ in 2017. He was also the Executive Director for FACT, The Foundation for Accountability & Civic Trust, an ethics and accountability watchdog, between 2014 and 2017. Mr. Whitaker is the Author of the book–Above the Law, The Inside Story of How the Justice Department Tried to Subvert President Trump.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
Election results are still pouring in on Wednesday as Americans wait with anticipation to see which party will gain control of Congress.
Watch Amanda break down the situation below:
ANALYSIS – HALLELUJAH! – As Joe Biden’s radical open door border policies allow tens of thousands of illegal migrants to flood into the country weekly, former president Donald Trump is vowing to deport many, if not most of them.
And that is one of the best things I have heard from Trump recently. This is the only way to reverse the massive foreign illegal invasion Biden has created.
While other GOP presidential candidates have talked tough on the border, so far only Trump has promised massive deportations.
There should always be exceptions, but in my estimation, most who have come here illegally under Biden must go.
Trump’s comments come as the numbers of illegal aliens are again skyrocketing at the border. In the past five days alone, there have been over 45,000 migrant encounters both at the ports of entry and between them, including multiple days of over 8,000 illegal immigrant encounters.
There were reportedly around 230,000 migrant encounters in August, though the Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) have not provided official figures yet.
This is unprecedented.
Blasting Biden for the “nation-wrecking catastrophe on our southern border,” during a speech in Dubuque, Iowa Wednesday evening, Trump promised that, if elected, he would carry out “the largest domestic deportation operation in American history.”
“Following the Eisenhower Model, we will carry out the largest domestic deportation operation in American history,” Trump said, as reported by Fox News.
Trump also said he would “immediately” invoke the Alien Enemies Act — part of the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 – a federal law granting the president unilateral power to detain and deport foreign aliens in the United States who are over 14 years old.
As NBC News reported, the law says a president may order non-citizens “to be apprehended, restrained, secured, and removed as alien enemies” when he or she “makes public proclamation” than an “invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States by any foreign nation.”
And as I have pointed out repeatedly, this current crisis certainly counts as an “invasion or predatory incursion,” in many ways controlled and directed by Mexican drug cartels.
Trump said he would use the Act to target suspected gang members, drug dealers and cartel members.
“I’ll…invoke immediately the Alien Enemies Act to remove all known or suspected gang members…the drug dealers, the cartel members from the United States, ending the scourge of illegal alien gang violence once and for all,” Trump vowed.
Trump added: “Under my leadership, we had the most secure border in U.S. history. Now, we have the worst border in the history of the world.”
Of course, you can’t solve the problem solely by deporting two million or more illegal migrants, especially criminals and gang members, numerous other Biden policies must also be quickly reversed.
And Trump addressed that too, in Iowa, saying that in his second term he would begin by “immediately” terminating “every Open Borders policy of the Biden Administration.”
At the top of his list, Trump promised to reinstate and “expand” the “travel ban” that he implemented during his first term.
The ban, which Joe Biden ended on his first day in office, barred most individuals from seven countries with high terrorism indices — including five Muslim-majority countries — from entering the United States.
But he didn’t stop there, Trump added that he would expand his travel ban to “deny entry to all communists and Marxists to the United States.”
“Those who join our country must love our country—and we are going to keep foreign Christian-hating communists, Marxists, and socialists the hell out of America,” Trump declared.
That might be trickier to do, but I like how he is thinking.
The former president also said he plans to “shift massive portions of federal law enforcement to immigration enforcement,” including some of the FBI, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).
“I will make clear that we must use any and all resources needed to stop the invasion—including moving thousands of troops currently stationed overseas to our OWN southern border,” Trump said, emphasizing that “before we defend the borders of foreign countries, we must secure the border of our country.”
This is the most clear and comprehensive response proposed to date by anyone, to counter Biden’s illegal immigrant catastrophe.
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.
It’s about time.
Watch Amanda explain the situation below:
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – From the beginning, conspiracies surrounded the Capitol Riot on January 6, 2021. Stunned conservatives couldn’t believe Republicans caused that mayhem. Some called it a deliberate false flag operation by the feds to entrap innocent Trump supporters and launch a massive witch hunt.
Both last two things did occur.
Meanwhile, the Democrats and media called the afternoon event an attempted coup and later more steadily ‘the insurrection.’
It was neither. But it also wasn’t a well-orchestrated false flag operation. The truth is just as bad but less planned.
I was at the Capitol on Jan 6 as a security contractor for a foreign TV news crew, and I condemned the violence the next day. I wrote that the, at times, violent riot wasn’t a coup, or an insurrection but the violence was criminal behavior, and should be punished.
I also noted that the rioters all appeared to be passionate Trump supporters, and not likely a false flag operation by the feds, or ANTIFA infiltrators.
Since then, I have defended many of the peaceful protesters unfairly caught up in the FBI dragnet and harshly charged for minor nonviolent crimes.
I have also written about the large number of undercover police and federal agents and their informants since identified at the Capitol that day. And I have noted how the Democrats in charge of the House and Senate that day refused National Guard support, as did the Democrat mayor of DC.
At least until it was too late.
Now, former Capitol Hill Police Chief Steven Sund has added his insight into the events. And he claims that it seems as if they wanted something to happen.
Sund resigned from his post shortly after the riots. He had been chief of the Capitol Police since 2019 and had served as a police officer for more than 30 years in total.
Newsmax reported on his untelevised interview with Tucker Carlson taped before Carlson was fired from Fox News:
“Everything appears to be a cover-up,” Sund told Carlson. “I’m not a conspiracy theorist … but when you look at the information and intelligence they had, the military had, it’s all watered down. I’m not getting intelligence, I’m denied any support from National Guard in advance. I’m denied National Guard while we’re under attack, for 71 minutes …”
… “Could there possibly be actually … they kind of wanted something to happen? It’s not a far stretch to begin to think that. It’s sad when you start putting everything together and thinking about the way this played out … what was their end goal?”
Sund told Carlson he believes that Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley and then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., had intelligence of what was coming on Jan. 6 but failed to communicate it and subsequently covered it up.
“If I was allowed to do my job as the chief we wouldn’t be here; this didn’t have to happen,” he said.
Carlson also said on Russel Brand’s podcast that Sund told him: ‘Oh yeah, that crowd was filled with federal agents.’
This all fits neatly with much of what I have noted previously. But while I blamed Democrat leaders for holding back needed support to defend the Capitol for other political reasons, Sund seems to believe they held it back because they started hoping for a big chaotic show they could then turn into a political circus.
And the chaos ensued, and so did their circus.
Sadly, Donald Trump and some of his supporters fell for the trap.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – Can we say dangerous left-wing intelligence hack?
With Joe Biden and the Democrats demonizing conservatives, partisan, out-of-work former intelligence officers, without much of a ‘war on terror’ to fight anymore, and looking for new work, are now targeting Americans as their new terrorist bogeyman.
And following the bizarre ‘underwear hammer attack’ on Nancy Pelosi’s husband in San Francisco, the Democrats are on a tear blaming Republicans for violence.
This is despite the fact that the Pelosi attacker was a crazy, life-long pot-smoking hippie, left-wing nudist, and illegal alien from Canada who only started making ‘right-wing’ social media posts a few weeks ago.
But once you designate your domestic political opponents as ‘extremists’ and ‘enemies of democracy,’ you open the door to widespread abuse and repression by the state.
And targeting American citizens as if they were ISIS is the result.
As I noted earlier, we should expect to see a host of these former ‘counter-extremism’ hacks try to parlay their experiences against al-Qaeda to use against their fellow citizens.
This is the old Cold War ‘Red Scare’ in reverse.
And this is just the latest example. A partisan former CIA officer proposing we illegally use ‘counterterror’ measures against Americans.
As Fox News reports:
Former Senior Intelligence Service officer at the CIA, Marc Polymeropoulos published a Sunday piece declaring that technique once used to fight radical Islam should be turned against the right-wing in America.
Polymeropoulos’ piece for NBC News Think warned that propagandists, whether Islamic terrorists or Republicans, should be subject to counterterrorism and counter-radicalization techniques.
“I worked in counterterrorism operations for nearly my entire career at the CIA before retiring in 2019. The battle we engaged in with international terrorist groups like Al Qaeda wasn’t just with their legions of foot soldiers but with their highly effective propaganda arms as well,” he wrote.
“The U.S. and our allies considered those propagandists fundamental cogs in a terror group’s machinery, and just as culpable as any other terrorist. So we held them accountable when innocent civilians were killed.”
Polymeropoulos suggested that the attack of Paul Pelosi was evidence that the American government needs to take a firmer approach to its own citizenry.
This type of thinking is outrageous on so many levels. Simply un-American. Unconstitutional. And extremely dangerous.
Polymeropoulos, who sounds more like a left-wing extremist than an intelligence officer, is also either willfully ignorant or outright deceptive when he claims that the American right has some sort of monopoly on violent rhetoric.
He laughably states that there is “nothing equivalent being done on the other side of the aisle” as far as promoting violence against their political opposition.
“Democratic politicians and leaders may not like Trump, but they don’t call for violence against him, let alone his execution,” he outrageously claimed.
Of course, this is outright false.
As Fox Notes: “He neglected to mention multiple incidents of left-wing calls to arms and violence against Republicans…”
Fox added examples:
In 2017, a far-left former Bernie Sanders campaign volunteer named James T. Hodgkinson fired upon on a group of Republican lawmakers as they practiced for the annual Congressional Baseball Game, critically injuring House Republican Whip Steve Scalise.
Democrats didn’t equate their own hyper-aggressive anti-GOP rhetoric with his violent actions.
And let’s be clear Democrat politicians do incite violence against their GOP opponents.
Fox continues:
Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., endorsed harassing political opposition in public in 2018. “They’re not going to be able to go to a restaurant, they’re not going to be able to stop at a gas station, they’re not going to be able to shop at a department store,” Waters proclaimed at the time. “The people are going to turn on them, they’re going to protest, they’re going to absolutely harass them.”
Polymeropoulos also ignores left-wing activists protesting in front of the houses of Supreme Court justices, firebombing crisis pregnancy centers, and doxing (posting the addresses of public figures online).
Not to mention the assassination attempt against Justice Brett Kavanaugh by a heavily armed man at his home.
Recall that in 2020, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., warned Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh that they “will pay the price” for rulings against abortion and “You won’t know what hit you.”
Can we say “incitement to violence” against Justices?
This ex-CIA hack also overlooks a full year of left-wing politically motivated riots in cities, often encouraged and enabled by Democrat politicians and ‘community’ leaders.
But facts, consistency, and fairness aren’t needed when you are a political hack trying to get the all-powerful government to use your now unneeded skills to target your fellow Americans who disagree with you.
All you need is your own extremist leftist rhetoric.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
Law schools across the country are abandoning their decades-long principles going woke and the move could prove disastrous for attorneys, current law students, and prospective law students across the nation.
Let Amanda break down the situation in the video below.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
