Random

    Opinion

    Home Opinion

    Transgender Mass Murderer Targets Christian School – Kills Six

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    0
    Image via Pixabay images

    ANALYSIS – None dare call it hate. The recent horrific mass killing in Nashville is even more tragic when we understand who the killer was – and how the mass media has either ignored or downplayed her ‘trans’ identity.

    Or has made it a point of calling her a man rather than a mentally ill woman.

    It’s also tragic, no – outrageous – that none in the establishment media, or Joe Biden or anyone in his administration, has labeled the shooting a ‘hate crime’ even though it was.

    Local law enforcement has called it a targeted attack against a Christian school.

    The heavily armed 28-year-old mass murderer Audrey Hale who committed the massacre at Covenant School used two AR-style rifles and a pistol to kill three 9-year-old children and three adults.

    Reportedly a former student, she was was killed by police. 

    Her ‘manifesto,’ discovered at her home, has still not been made public.

    The killer was first reported correctly as a woman.

    Then the media fell all over itself apologizing for its mistake and quickly began stealth editing its initial reports and started calling her a ‘transgender male’ (which in most cases is actually a female claiming to be male).

    It is now mostly downplaying the trans issue and the fact that she was being treated for ’emotional’ issues.

    And unlike the rhetoric often employed by Democrats after a shooter targets any minority community – like an LGBTQ club or killings simply in a neighborhood with a high number of Asian Americans – they aren’t calling this a ‘hate crime.’

    The left is usually very quick to identify any crime it can committed by white conservatives, MAGA Republicans or Donald Trump supporters.

    Sometimes it is valid. Most of the time it is not.

    As my Georgetown roommate, and colleague, Quin Hillyer writes in the Washington Examiner:

    The message is clear: The media will bend over backward to kowtow to transgender ideology when it benefits the gender bender yet will also do backflips to hide a transgender status if somebody might draw negative inferences. Too bad the media honchos aren’t concerned about contributing to inaccurate characterizations of conservative people as dangerous and unhinged.

    First, let me be clear, most conservatives despise the ‘hate crime’ moniker because, well, a crime is a crime. Murder isn’t more of a murder because of the races or identities of the victims or perpetrators.

    But if you are going to use the term and have it impact how cases are investigated, tried and suspects are sentenced, then call this what it was – a hate crime against Christians by a lunatic transgender person.

    Federal law considers violence that causes bodily injury to a person to be a hate crime if it is motivated by race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity or disability.

    Of course, the fact that this killer was ‘trans’ shouldn’t become the sole focus, nor should it be used to unfairly label other trans persons.

    But it should be noted by the media and included in the entire process.

    And the targeting of Christians by a trans person should be a major focus.

    Senator Josh Hawley, R-Mo., who has opposed hate crime legislation in the past as too broad, quickly took action to ensure this anti-Christian hate crime perpetrated by a self-described transgender was treated as such.

    He called on federal authorities Tuesday to investigate Monday’s massacre as a hate crime against Christian believers.

    The New York Post reported:

    In a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray and Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, Hawley described Audrey Hale’s rampage through the Tennessee school that left three adults and three 9-year-old children dead as a “targeted” assault “against Christians” and called for “the full resources of the federal government” to be deployed to determine why the 28-year-old former student carried out the heinous crime. 

    “It is commonplace to call such horrors ‘senseless violence.’ But properly speaking, that is false,” Hawley writes. “Police report that the attack here was ‘targeted’ — targeted, that is, against Christians.”

    “I urge you to immediately open an investigation into this shooting as a federal hate crime. The full resources of the federal government must be brought to bear to determine how this crime occurred, and who may have influenced the deranged shooter to carry out these horrific crimes.

    Now, let’s see how Team Biden and the establishment media react.

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

    Pentagon Spying on Everything for Bad Comments About Generals

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    2
    David B. Gleason from Chicago, IL, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

    ANALYSIS – Big Brother keeps growing – As part of the broader government war against free speech, the Department of Defense (DoD) is now using Orwellian means to search the internet, social media, and just about everything else, for things we say or post.

    And it’s not just for legitimate physical threats against generals, it will also be looking for simple negative comments about our top military leaders.

    And we should all be outraged. This really is scary stuff. This even goes beyond recent reports of the government buying our detailed personal information from data brokers, which I wrote about here.

    The military runs a little-known outfit called the Army Protective Services Battalion under the Army’s Criminal Investigation Division (CID). Think of it as the Pentagon’s Secret Service for generals.

    Its mission specifically falls under CID’s Executive Protection and Special Investigations Field Office. And it has a lot of resources. Its new webpage notes:

    With over 400 assigned special agents, police officers, analysts, physical security specialists, and professional support personnel spread across three continents, the Executive Protection Field Office is the largest office within CID providing worldwide dignitary protection for the Secretary of Defense, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Secretary of the Army, Chief of Staff of the Army, and over a dozen other protectees in domestic and overseas locations.

    Executive Protection also protects foreign counterparts during official visits to the United States, along with designated former or retired Department of Defense officials. Army CID’s dignitary protection mission is supported by robust protective intelligence and threat management investigative capabilities. [Emphasis added].

    This perfectly legitimate organization exists to safeguard our senior military brass, as well as foreign brass visiting our country. As part of its duties, it conducts legitimate ‘protective intelligence’ to identify potential physical threats to its protectees. 

    I am very familiar with their mission having worked with some of these folks as a military attaché during high-level foreign visits by our Defense Secretary and generals. I also have professional experience with dignitary protection. 

    All this is very good and vital stuff.

    The problem arises when the scope of the protective intelligence mission expands to include things that it shouldn’t. In this case, the unit is tasked to protect current and former high-ranking military officers from “assassination, kidnapping, injury or embarrassment.” 

    Yes, among the big threats is “embarrassment.” 

    That’s bad enough since it opens the door to looking into things that they shouldn’t just because they might embarrass a general. 

    But now, according to an Army procurement document from September 2022, reports the Intercept, the detachment’s mission has expanded to include monitoring social media for “direct, indirect, and veiled” threats and identifying “negative sentiment” regarding its protectees. 

    And it’s hiring a technology contractor to do its dirty work.

    “Negative sentiment” – that is almost as bad as “mean tweets.” It is beyond outrageous.

    I have expressed ‘negative sentiment’ toward a few senior military leaders numerous times online and in published articles – including Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs General Mark Milley.

    And I will continue to do so, as is my 1st amendment right.

    The line should be when anyone makes veiled or direct physical threats against any political or military leader, not just says mean things.

    As The Intercept reports: “There may be legally valid reasons to intrude on someone’s privacy by searching for, collecting, and analyzing publicly available information, particularly when it pertains to serious crimes and terrorist threats,” Ilia Siatitsa, program director at Privacy International, said.

    “However,” he added, “expressing ‘positive or negative sentiment towards a senior high-risk individual’ cannot be deemed sufficient grounds for government agencies to conduct surveillance operations.”

    Siatitsa rightly concluded: “The ability to express opinions, criticize, make assumptions, or form value judgments — especially regarding public officials — is a quintessential part of democratic society.”

    Beyond that, what if the Army is protecting a Chinese general visiting the United States? Will they surveil or target Americans who are critical of this foreign adversary’s general or of China?

    And according to the documents uncovered by The Intercept, the program the Army is procuring for its newly expanded intelligence mission is a dystopian surveillance nightmare. 

    It will scour everything, everywhere, and then even pinpoint the location of the person making the comment.

    This is extremely frightening.

    The Army describes their surveillance system as “a reliable social media threat mitigation service” with an “Open-Source Web-based toolkit with advanced capabilities to collect publicly available information (PAI).”

    Information is not only grabbed up from Twitter’s “firehose” but also from 4Chan, Reddit, YouTube, Discord, Telegram, private contractors like Dataminr, as well as smartphone apps and advertisers.

    Combined with cellular location data the Army could also precisely pinpoint those who might make a mean tweet about current or former military officials. 

    The Intercept adds that all this data, plus CCTV feeds, radio stations, personal records, and even webcams – would be available via a “universal search selector.” That means they can access just about anything.

    The Army also wants the contractor to preserve the “anonymity and security needed” by “using various egress points globally to mask their identity.” This means they can conveniently make it look like the folks doing the snooping are in China or Russia.

    This is a very scary domestic spying capability to use against Americans. Congress must investigate this Orwellian program immediately and remove elements that will infringe on our constitutional rights.

    Or it will soon be used against you.

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

    Amanda Head: My Thoughts On Last Night And What’s To Come

    By
    Amanda Head
    -
    0

    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:

    GOP-led House to Force Out Horrible DHS Secretary Mayorkas Over Border, Other Disasters

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    7
    NEW YORK CITY (September 11, 2022) Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas lays flowers for USSS Master Special Officer Craig Miller and participates in the September 11th Anniversary Commemoration Ceremony at Ground Zero in New York City, NY. (DHS photo by Sydney Phoenix)

    ANALYSIS – The pressure on incompetent ideologue, Alejandro Mayorkas, Joe Biden’s Homeland Security chief, is increasing daily. 

    His inability, or unwillingness to control the violent chaos at the border, and other major missteps, such as overhyping the ‘right wing’ domestic threat, are making him the lightning rod for the newly elected GOP-led House.

    As I wrote earlier, the House must aggressively investigate Mayorkas, and if needed, impeach him.

    He should be one of the first Team Biden heads to roll in 2023.

    Newsmax reports: “The White House will pressure Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas to resign before House Republicans can push for his impeachment, but he likely won’t willingly step down…”

    “The White House sees the writing on the wall,”  said Mark Morgan, the acting Customs and Border Patrol Commissioner under former President Donald Trump, on Newsmax TV’s “Wake Up America.” 

    “They know what’s going on. I think they’re going to put pressure on Secretary Mayorkas to resign to prevent them the embarrassment of being dragged through hearings.”

    But Mayorkas’ “ego and pride” won’t let him “do what he needs to do in the best interests of this country,” Morgan added.

    Newsmax continued:

    His comments come after remarks by House Republican Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, who hopes to become the House speaker after the new Congress is sworn in this coming January.

    Tuesday, McCarthy called on Mayorkas to step down and warned that the House might call for his impeachment after Republicans take over the majority…

    “We know Mayorkas has been this administration’s chief architect of the open border,” said Morgan. “He took the most secure border in our lifetime and intentionally un-secured it. In the last 22 months, we’ve had over 4.5 million encounters and 1.1 million known gotaways. 

    We know drugs are pouring into this country, literally killing Americans every single day. We know among the 1.1. million known gotaways are hardcore criminals, murderers, rapists, pedophiles, and gang members.

    But while McCarthy emphasizes the border crisis, Mayorkas is also guilty of falsely demonizing and targeting half of all Americans.

    As the Center for Security Policy (CSP) explains:

    Alejandro Mayorkas [has] parroted the oft-repeated line that the biggest terrorist threat America faces comes from “domestic ideologically motivated extremism.”

    This is a central assertion by the Biden Administration…They have even gone so far as to claim U.S. law enforcement and the military are riddled with domestic extremists despite the fact there has been no real evidence released to support this supposition.

    CSP continues:

    In order to hype the seriousness of the domestic threat, the Biden Administration has soft-pedaled the very real danger of international terrorism.  According to Forbes, Mayorkas reported “that since the September 11 attacks, the threat landscape against the U.S. has substantially ‘evolved’ to the point that foreign terrorism is no longer the chief concern of DHS.”

    In other words, the threat from jihad receded and now takes a back seat to domestic “extremism.” In fact, Mayorkas said that the main threat was now what occurred on January 6 at the U.S. Capitol.

    The actions by Mayorkas at the border, and by hyping the so-called domestic threat are nothing short of disgraceful.

    We can only hope his ego doesn’t allow him to resign. It’s time for a real prime-time Congressional hearing focused on all these critical Team Biden- created issues.

    And then, if Biden doesn’t fire him, he should be impeached. GAND

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

    More Media Company Layoffs

    By
    Amanda Head
    -
    1

    More media companies are feeling the pinch…

    Watch Amanda explain the situation:

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

    France’s Riots are Like our BLM Riots – Not Really About the Police

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    5

    ANALYSIS – Another summer of rage erupts in Paris, this time sparked by the police shooting several days ago of a 17-year-old Muslim man of North African origin. Many liken the fiery French riots to our own Black Lives Matter (BLM) riots of 2020. 

    And in many ways, they are similar.

    They both used the police killing of a man of color to justify violence, arson, looting, and spreading chaos. Their initial stated agenda was to highlight police brutality and police racism, then just racism. 

    Then a bunch of other stuff.

    In the United States, a lot of the BLM rioting was targeted at President Donald Trump. In France, some of the rage is directed at Jews. 

    Meanwhile, both violent rampages were quickly co-opted, if not initially instigated, by extremist ideologies and agendas. In the U.S., BLM was run by the far left and often became dominated by issues totally unrelated to the police or even racism. 

    In Paris, the riots are as much about a growing unassimilated Arab/North African Muslim minority bringing radical Islam to France, as it is about the police or race.

    It’s also about being anti-Jewish, anti-Catholic, and anti-French.

    Just as BLM often disparaged all of white America as being racist while targeting cops, many French Muslims see the entire French system as evil.

    And part of that ruling system includes French Jews.

    The Times of Israel reported that “perpetrators did vandalize a monument for Holocaust victims in Nanterre, the Paris suburb where the 17-year-old, identified in the French media only as Nahel M., was killed. The perpetrators spray-painted the words ‘Police scum’ on the monument.”

    Antisemitic chants have also  been heard during the riots, “part of a well-documented sentiment among some Muslims who see Jews as part of an oppressive power structure.”

    While Jews haven’t been attacked directly yet, these riots remind many French Jews of 2014, when Muslim rioters singled out Jewish-owned shops in a Paris suburb nicknamed “little Jerusalem” due to its large Jewish population.

    That anti-Jewish violence, which also targeted several synagogues, was partly spurred by Muslim anger toward Jews amid the 2014 Gaza war between Israel and Hamas and other terrorist groups.

    Today we have Israel engaged in a major military operation in the West Bank against Palestinian terrorists using the Jenin refugee camp as a base for attacks against Israelis. This operation began Monday, and we have yet to see its impact on the riots in France.

    If the conflict extends in the West Bank, expect things to heat up more in Paris.

    But as The Times of Israel also noted, this violent uprising in Paris is far more widespread than ever before. And might be a turning point for how the French view their suicidally insane immigration policies.

    “In 2014, I was afraid as a Jew. This time, I’m afraid as a Frenchman,” said Jonathan C., noting that he does not have a Middle Eastern appearance.

    The Times added:

    Police and firefighters are common targets of violence by rioters whom many believe are acting out of resentment of French society, where the anti-immigration far right is the second-largest political force.

    Other incidents are seen by some as reflecting a religious dimension of the riots, which are occurring in heavily Muslim areas.

    On Thursday, two unidentified individuals beat up and robbed a priest in Saint-Etienne near Lyon. Disagreements exist on whether the assault, the second attack of a priest in the region in three weeks, was part of the riots.

    Hate attacks against Christians are multiplying in France, where in 2021 the interior ministry recorded 1,052 anti-Christian hate crimes, nearly double the assaults on Jews. It meant that Christians were, in absolute numbers at least, the religious group that was most targeted that year.

    This worries many in France. They see the huge number of antisemitic and anti-Christian attacks, as well as attacks against police, as part of a resurgence of radical Islam in unassimilated migrant communities.

    Even if these riots subside, the bigger danger remains. And that should be a concern for not just Paris, but other major European cities as well.

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

    Retired Generals Bash West Point for Betraying Core Values, Instilling Socialism

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    10
    Daniel Ramirez from Honolulu, USA, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

    ANALYSIS – Two retired generals, and a retired colonel, all three graduates of the U.S. Military Academy (USMA) at West Point, have signed a statement, nominally representing the long list of West Point graduates known as the ‘Long Gray Line,’ accusing the academy of violating its core values.

    And also of imposing socialist, anti-American indoctrination.

    When you wonder why so many of our military commanders are involved in scandals, and accused of moral and ethical lapses, and even crimes, look no further than West Point, and the other national military academies. 

    In their August 17 missive emailed to a long email list and posted on the website of the MacArthur Society of West Point Graduates, the senior officers, LTG Thomas McInerney, USAF (Ret), MG Paul E. Vallely, US Army (Ret), and Col Andrew O’Meara, US Army (Ret), argue that the academy no longer truly enforces the proud institution’s Cadet Honor Code. 

    Despite West Point’s motto being “Duty, Honor, Country,” and that motto forming the basis of the Cadet Honor Code, it is now enforced less than half the time.

    Rather than resulting in expulsion as in the past, the officers note that “today, the Academy’s website makes the casual web disclaimer that over 50% of convicted violators [of the honor code] are excused and allowed to graduate.”

    But the rot goes far further and deeper than just letting unethical cadets graduate to form the backbone of the Army’s officer corps. These cadets are increasingly being indoctrinated in neo-Marxist socialist ideology “that runs counter to the noble principles of the Constitution.”

    They add that: “The corruption of cadet instruction with socialist doctrine is further demonstrated by a pronounced bias in selecting guest speakers, who have been almost exclusively liberal.” 

    [I would argue they are leftist not liberal]

    “We could not identify any conservative speakers in recent years,” they noted. The officers continue:

    Specifically, they argue, the teaching of Critical Race Theory (CRT) at the Academy, or ideas derived from that theory, “severs the ties of every cadet to the defense of the Constitution, thereby nullifying the oath cadets have sworn to uphold.”

    They explain that: “Critical Race Theory now replaces Duty, Honor, and Country,” at West Point.

    And CRT is a cancer.

    Critical Race Theory considers the founders evil, the Constitution illegitimate, and the Republic systemically racist. It abolishes the Declaration of Independence that declares all men are created equal. It brands the population as racist, privileged, and unfit to enjoy citizenship rights.

    The writers add: “Officers and enlisted troops must sit through leftist indoctrination sessions that portray America as an inherently racist nation, white troops as genetically bigoted, and minority troops as hopeless, lifelong victims.”   

    And the authors specifically single out Joe Biden and his team of leftists for accelerating this indoctrination and subversion at the academy, and throughout our military:

    The Biden Administration seeks to divorce military service from the defense of the Constitution by replacing allegiance to the Constitution with Critical Race Theory. This prepares the military for its role in support of an overthrow of the government and the Constitutional order. By forcing the military to undergo liberal socialist indoctrination, they sever the linkage between US military service and support for the Constitution. 

    To these senior retired officers, the goal is nothing less than the overthrow of our Constitutional system from within. 

    Using the manufactured threat of ‘white extremism,’ as the excuse, the left is forcing Critical Race Theory indoctrination on our military to prevent any internal military opposition to the increasingly anti-constitutional actions of this, and other, far-left administrations.

    Ultimately, they note: “The cumulative impact of these changes has so altered the Military Academy that USMA betrays the purpose for which it was founded in 1802 – defense of our Constitution and maintenance of individual freedom.”

    And I will add – If we don’t remove this rot very quickly, our Republic is truly doomed.

    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.

    AP ‘Stylebook’ – How the Left Manipulates Abortion Language to Manipulate News

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    0
    Washington D.C., USA - January 22, 2015; A Pro-Life woman clashes with a group of Pro-Choice demonstrators at the U.S. Supreme Court.

    ANALYSIS – Most conservatives understand that one of the left’s major weapons in the war of ideas is manipulating language and using well-researched buzzwords and phrases to change reality and mask their more extreme ideas.

    We see it every day with the constant use of ‘gun violence’ rather than shooting or murder committed by a criminal. We see it with ‘global warming’ becoming ‘climate change’ when the facts don’t support the narrative.

    We also see it with the insanely deceptive and grotesque ‘gender-affirming care’ rather for genital-mutilating sex-change surgery.

    And of course, we see it in spades with abortion, where supporting the unrestricted killing of unborn babies in the womb becomes ‘reproductive health care rights,’ previously known as being ‘pro-choice.’

    The new term is far better politically since it appears to somehow be about rights and health, not deception and killing. Plus, ‘pro-choice’ has been thoroughly sullied by its accurate association with being ‘pro-abortion.’

    And we can’t have that.

    And now, since the Dobbs decision correctly returned the abortion issue to the states where it always belonged, the battle to control the language, and hence the narrative on abortion, is intensifying.

    And it just got a lot worse.

    The latest words and phrases chosen by the left to describe or refer to abortion fly in the face of fact and science.

    But the leftist language warriors are now being reinforced by the power behind the news media – the Associated Press—and its widely used ‘Stylebook.’

    The Daily Signal reports:

    The Associated Press recently released a guide for news outlets for reporting on abortion that’s so biased in favor of the procedure, its guidance often runs contrary to medical science. The new guide has the ability to significantly distort how Americans perceive the abortion issue.

    The AP’s “Abortion Topical Guide” is part of the widely used “AP Stylebook” that many outlets across the country, including The Daily Signal, use as a guide for everything from grammar to punctuation to best practices for terms and phrasing.

    One glaring problem among many? The guide frequently cites the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists to back up its guidance. ACOG claims to be the premier professional membership organization of OB-GYNs. But on the issue of abortion—a procedure that most OB-GYNs don’t perform—ACOG is wholly committed to lobbying for extreme abortion policies that don’t reflect its membership’s views.

    In typical Orwellian fashion, the leftists at AP cudgel writers into referring to an unborn child’s “heartbeat,” which is detectable via ultrasound from the very early stages of life to the deliberately bland and mostly meaningless term “cardiac activity.”

    The Stylebook also inappropriately enters the scientific realm as self-made medical experts when it advises writers not to refer to unborn children as “pain-capable” until after at least 24 weeks.

    This, even though the beloved doctors who actually perform surgeries on ‘preemies,’ or premature babies in utero, regularly use anesthesia for those babies under 24 weeks because they feel pain.

    The AP’s demonic advice also contradicts the massive, and growing, body of research showing unborn babies can feel pain at just 15 weeks or even earlier.

    And most importantly, the Stylebook admonishes writers to never, ever use the accurate but uncomfortable phrase – ‘late-term abortion.’

    Polls show a solid majority of Americans are opposed to late-term abortions, so best to religiously (pun intended) avoid the term.

    The Daily Signal concludes:

    The AP guide misses the mark throughout. Of course, that’s inevitable when the goal is not objective reporting of fact but rather promoting pro-abortion propaganda. Try as the AP might, it’s a fool’s errand to put lipstick on a pig.

    I go further by saying AP is part of the left’s far-flung language-distorting media empire intended to manipulate words, in order to manipulate news, in order to manipulate you.

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

    This Man Stole Trump’s Tax Returns And Illegally Leaked Them. So Why Is DOJ Letting Him Off Easy?

    By
    Donny Ferguson
    -
    8
    Donald Trump via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    A former IRS consultant who stole the tax returns of President Donald Trump and thousands of wealthy individuals, then leaked them to liberal media outlets to campaign for tax hikes, has pleaded guilty to a single count of “unauthorized disclosure of tax return and return information,” despite confessing in court to committing the crime thousands of times.

    The decision to charge Charles Littlejohn with a single minor crime, while seeking decades in prison for Trump and many of his supporters, has many claiming it is yet another example of a politicized Justice Department.

    Littlejohn faces a maximum of five years in prison, but will almost certainly serve far less than that, if any, time.

    Littlejohn used his access to confidential information to steal the tax returns of Trump and wealthy individuals, often saving the electronic files to personal devices like an iPad, then leaking the documents to the New York Times and the liberal activist outlet ProPublica.

    The illegal leaks set off a feeding frenzy in the media, who used the illicit disclosures to attack Trump and falsely campaign for tax hikes.

    The DOJ’s decision to give Littlejohn a sweetheart plea deal, while targeting Trump supporters with harsh charges, has some in Congress calling out what they see as a biased and two-tier justice system.

    “The defendant admitted to making two separate disclosures to two separate news outlets impacting over a thousand taxpayers, and further admitted to impeding or obstructing the investigation — yet the Department of Justice inexplicably only pursued one count of unauthorized disclosure,” the House Committee on Ways and Means Committee fumed in a statement.

    “Ways and Means Committee Republicans have pushed federal investigators for years to get to the bottom of who stole and leaked the taxpayer information of thousands of Americans – including those of former President Donald Trump. Finally, the thief has been identified, charged, and now has pled guilty to this unprecedented crime,” said Committee Chairman Jason Smith (R-Mo.).

    “Unfortunately, the Department of Justice elected to charge only one count despite the more than a thousand disclosures he admitted to in open court. To restore trust in the justice system and the IRS – and to deter future thefts – there need to be significant consequences for this type of illegal, politically motivated activity,” Smith added.

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