Random

    Opinion

    Home Opinion

    C*VID Could Be Linked to China’s Secret Biowarfare Program: House GOP Intel Report

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    4
    Ureem2805, CC BY-SA 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

    ANALYSIS – While I never claimed C*VID was a deliberately released Chinese b*oweapon or even explicitly that it was part of a b*oweapons program, I did point out that China had an extensive biowarfare program that could be involved with the creation and leak of the v*rus.

    I also explored the likely theory that C*VID-*9 accidentally escaped from the BSL-4 bio lab at the W*han Institute of Vir*logy.

    This was the W*han bio-leak theory.

    To me, this was a no-brainer and something any intelligence analyst of any merit should have been evaluating when C*VID first surfaced in W*han, China, in December 2019.

    However, the mere mention of any of these considerations was immediately crushed by so-called scientific experts, the media, left-leaning politicians and a host of others, branding it disinformation or misinformation to even mention the possibility that C*VID could be man-made.

    Big Tech social media platforms quickly made it their job to ferociously suppress any discussion that China may have accidentally created C*VID, much less that it could be tied to a Chinese military b*owarfare program.

    This censorship affected scientists, and others, and even resulted in many respected persons, including me, being canceled by social media platforms, such as LinkedIn. [Editor’s Note: This article is currently being censored]

    This draconian response was partly due to President Trump noting this was a possibility, producing a visceral reaction to say the opposite.

    But the U.S. Intelligence Community (IC) was also part of the major effort to downplay any connection between C*VID and China’s b*oweapons, claiming in an October 2021 Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) assessment that S*RS-C*V-2 was “probably not a b*ological weapon.”

    Over time, as the evidence piled up, and experts became less afraid to contradict the official narrative, more and more reporting was done pointing to the W*han bio lab as the potential source of an accidental leak.

    And now we are going beyond that and potentially linking C*VID to China’s secretive military b*owarfare effort.

    A new unclassified report released by GOP members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) argues that C*VID-*9 “may have been tied” to China’s b*ological weapons research program.

    The minority report, released on Dec. 14 states that “there are indications that S*RS-C*V-2 may have been tied to China’s biological weapons research program and spilled over to the human population during a lab-related incident at the W*han Institute of Vir*logy (WIV).”

    Significantly, the committee blamed the intelligence community when it further stated in its report that it has “reason to believe that the IC downplayed the possibility that S*RS-C*V-2 was connected to China’s b*oweapons program based in part on input from outside experts.”

    These ‘outside’ experts the IC relied on were of course extremely biased, many with political, ideological or financial agendas.

    The GOP report also highlights that the intelligence community has “failed to comply” with numerous requests for information—including bipartisan committee questions about the experts relied upon for its assessment.

    As The Epoch Times reported, Rep. Brad Wenstrup, R-Ohio, noted the IC’s non-compliance when he stated: “We should know who is making these decisions and how they are coming to their conclusions. I think that’s our responsibility as oversight, and to date, we have not received that information.”

    Expect the Republican majority to push the intelligence community harder on this issue when it takes control of the HPSCI and other related committees.

    It’s time we learn the full truth about how these assessments were completed. And also learn as much as possible about the true origins of C*VID. 

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

    Should the Government Regulate Artificial Intelligence (AI)? Less is Best

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    6
    Image via Pixabay free images.

    ANALYSIS – Artificial Intelligence (AI) is basically self-learning software (algorithms) that grows smarter over time using the entire world’s ever-growing library of data as its teacher. It can learn to do myriad complex tasks in a fraction of the time humans could.

    It will revolutionize and upend entire economies, and dominate future warfare. It is also developing at an unprecedented rate. 

    Many are concerned AI will take away entire career fields and tens of millions of American jobs. AI advancements could eliminate up to 300 million jobs globally, according to Goldman Sachs.

    Fox News reported: “Up to 30% of hours currently worked across the U.S. economy could become automated by 2030, creating the possibility of around 12 million occupational transitions in the coming years, according to a McKinsey Global Institute study.”

    Others worry that it will make a few corporations extremely rich and powerful. 

    And then, many worry that Al may supersede human intelligence in just a few years and eventually make humans redundant.

    Few would deny that whoever dominates AI may dominate the world. China certainly believes this and is forging ahead to become the world leader in AI.

    The Pentagon is also looking closely at how it can use AI to more quickly make strategic or battlefield assessments and technologically leapfrog over our enemies.

    But what about our government? Should it regulate AI?

    Democrats tend to favor regulating everything. And they have shown the danger of doing so with social media. I recently wrote on how Joe Biden is already using executive power to weaponize Artificial Intelligence to be woke.

    I noted that: “The American Accountability Foundation (AAF), a government watchdog group, recently warned that Team Biden is actively using the federal government’s vast power to regulate AI to promote a “woke” ideology in the basic architecture of this revolutionary, powerful, and dangerous new technology.”

    “That ‘woke’ ideology promotes affirmative action under the guise of ‘anti-racism,’ and transgenderism as gender ‘equity.’”

    And that is a huge concern.

    Republicans tend to be more skeptical of regulation in general, especially in a dynamic, fast-moving technology that few lawmakers understand.

    “Let a bunch of guys up here that are wearing JCPenney leisure suits that still have 8-track tape players in their ’72 Vegas start talking about technology, then you got some problems,” Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., told Fox News when asked about regulation keeping pace with the AI sector.

    “The problem with AI is that it’s advancing so fast,” Republican Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina said. “It’s very difficult to regulate because you don’t know what the next thing is going to be.”

    Republicans, like Burchett and Mace, also worry government regulation will stifle AI innovation and put the U.S. at a strategic disadvantage, especially vis a vis China.

    “I don’t know that we need regulation,” Burchett said. “You want to stifle growth; you start putting laws on it.”

    “If you overregulate, like the government often does, you stifle innovation,” Mace told Fox News. “And if we just stop AI, nothing is stopping China. We want to make sure that we are No. 1 in AI technology in the world and that it stays that way.”

    But we may be losing that race. As Time reported:

    “The country that is able to most rapidly and effectively integrate new technology into war-fighting wins,” Alexandr Wang, the CEO of Scale AI, told lawmakers on a House Armed Services subcommittee. China is spending three times more than the U.S. on developing AI tools, Wang noted. “The Chinese Communist Party deeply understands the potential for AI to disrupt warfare, and is investing heavily to capitalize,” he said. “AI is China’s Apollo project.”

    But Republicans in Congress aren’t doing anything to take away Biden’s power to regulate AI himself. And time is of the essence.

    As a former Democrat Senator, Kent Conrad, and ex-Republican Senator Saxby Chambliss wrote recently in Fox News:

    This comes at a pivotal moment. We are on the precipice of a new tech revolution—one in which a collection of next-generation capabilities—such as AI, quantum computing, and biotechnology—promise to fundamentally upend every facet of society.

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

    America Ascendant: The Golden Age Nobody Saw Coming

    By
    Alex Muse
    -
    3
    Donald Trump via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    It is not hyperbole to speak of a golden age. The phrase has been cheapened by pundits and prematurely invoked by partisans, but now it fits. Something has shifted in the tectonic plates of American politics, culture, and global influence. And unlike prior inflection points, this one is not merely symbolic. It is empirical. Measurable. Concrete. We are not gazing at a mirage, but witnessing a renaissance. The agent of this change is President Donald J. Trump.

    In 2019, the New York Times launched the 1619 Project with a simple proposition: that the true founding of America occurred not with the Declaration of Independence, but with the arrival of the first African slaves. What followed was a coordinated attempt to reframe the country as irredeemably racist, its history irreparably stained. Under the Biden administration, this view metastasized. Patriotic symbols were treated as threats. The FBI circulated training documents labeling common American flags as markers of “domestic extremism.” Catholics were surveilled, not for terrorism, but for attending Latin Mass. And over 800 January 6 defendants were held for years, many for crimes more symbolic than violent. Meanwhile, across the country, statues of Lincoln, Washington, and Jefferson were torn down by mobs or removed by local governments in the dead of night. Schools named after America’s founders were renamed for lesser figures more palatable to progressive tastes. Military bases, long-standing monuments to American history, were stripped of their names and given bland, ideologically approved replacements. The point was not justice. It was deterrence. It was ideological conformity enforced by state power.

    Then Trump returned.

    His re-election, certified on January 6, 2025, and his inauguration on January 20, marked not merely the return of a man, but the restoration of a nation. Within 100 days, Trump had secured the border, reversing years of open-border chaos. Migration flows dropped to levels unseen since the early 1990s. His decisive action became a global model. From England to Romania, political movements took note. Nigel Farage’s Reform UK surged. The AfD in Germany crept into double digits. Marine Le Pen’s party is now the frontrunner in France. Elites sneered, but voters saw results.

    At home, Trump wielded his mandate like a scalpel. The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), led by Elon Musk, began a forensic audit of the administrative state. Within weeks, billions in funding were clawed back from useless programs and slush funds hidden in alphabet agencies. USAID, long a globalist piggy bank, is being dismantled. The FBI, purged of its partisan leadership, is now focused on actual crime. DEI offices, once metastasizing across government and corporate America like ideological tumors, were defunded. Wokeness, once a cultural juggernaut, is now a punchline.

    The military, gutted by social engineering and recruitment failures under Biden, is now over capacity. Credit belongs not only to President Trump’s message of strength and national pride, but also to Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, who moved swiftly to eliminate identity-based promotions and reinstate merit as the lodestar of advancement. Hegseth’s decision to end the inclusion of transgender individuals in combat roles and restore a focus on unit cohesion and battlefield readiness was met with predictable outrage from progressive quarters, but it worked. Military service is now admired again. Recruiters have lines out the door. The stars and stripes, once seen as fraught, are fashionable again. The American flag, once viewed with suspicion on elite campuses, is now trending in TikTok videos of patriotic Gen Z influencers. Coolness, that elusive cultural currency, has shifted.

    Internationally, Trump has turned the tide. China is back at the negotiating table, offering market access in exchange for tariff relief. For the first time in decades, Beijing blinked. Iran, isolated and bleeding economically, has returned to disarmament talks. The Abraham Accords have expanded to include Oman and Tunisia. Just today, Trump announced a new trade deal with the United Kingdom that will open British markets to American farmers, slash tariffs, and generate billions in revenue. It is the first of more than a dozen similar deals being negotiated with U.S. trading partners, all aimed at restoring prosperity and security to the American heartland. American prestige, once bartered away for UN resolutions and climate pledges, has been restored. Even the Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church’s College of Cardinals seems to have acknowledged this new moral order.

    On May 8, 2025, for the first time in 2,000 years of Catholic history, an American was elected pope. The symbolism is staggering. For a Church whose demographic heart now beats in the Western Hemisphere, the election of an American Pontiff signals a new center of gravity. It is not just Rome that looks to America. It is the world.

    America’s 250th anniversary is now on the horizon. The semiquincentennial of 1776 looms not as a melancholy remembrance of faded glory, but as a celebration of resurgence. The events planned for 2026 reflect this. Trump has ordered a return to original principles: liberty, individual rights, national pride. Not apologies. Not guilt. Not equivocations. But more than that, he intends to use the anniversary as a global advertisement. A demonstration of American resolve. A reminder to our enemies that this is a nation of strength, unity, and enduring purpose. And a signal to our allies that America, once written off as declining or distracted, is once again the anchor of the free world. A nation built on the proposition that all men are created equal should not teach its children that they are born guilty because of their skin or their flag. Trump understands this, and his policies reflect it.

    Consider economics. In just over three months, Trump has attracted over $8 trillion in foreign investment back to American shores, revitalizing the heartland. Factories are reopening in Ohio, chip manufacturers are building plants in Texas, and manufacturing is surging with new, higher-paying jobs for American workers. Trump’s commitment to the American farmer is unwavering, with policies boosting agriculture, creating robust farming jobs, and safeguarding rural communities. AI and crypto, once fields dominated by offshore interests and regulatory chaos, are now firmly within American jurisdiction. His administration is protecting America’s supply chains from global threats, ensuring self-reliance in critical industries. Trump’s policy is clear: innovation without apology, regulation with reason, and a fierce dedication to bringing back manufacturing, mining, drilling, and farming. He is not afraid of technology or competition but is resolute against decay, acting decisively to secure prosperity for American workers and farmers.

    And yet, symbols matter. Culture matters. Which is why the upcoming twin spectacles of the FIFA World Cup and the Summer Olympics cannot be dismissed as fluff. Trump’s personal involvement in securing these events was not mere vanity. It was strategy. It was signal. During his first term, Trump courted FIFA President Gianni Infantino with unusual persistence. Infantino credited Trump’s enthusiasm as pivotal to the U.S. winning the bid. “You are part of the FIFA team now,” he said in the Oval Office. That statement, once treated as flattery, now seems prophetic.

    The 2026 World Cup will be the longest in history: 104 matches across 16 U.S. cities. It will not be a tournament. It will be a coronation. The same applies to the 2028 Summer Olympics in Los Angeles. Trump personally engaged with the IOC before even taking office in 2016, offering federal guarantees for security and logistics. He met with IOC President Thomas Bach in 2017. The result? A winning bid. The message is clear: if America is back, it must also be seen. And what better global stage than the Olympics?

    Critics will scoff. They always do. They did in 2016. They did in 2020. They did in 2024. They were wrong every time. Trump’s critics have spent years arguing that he is a fluke, a menace, an aberration. What they have missed, and what they still refuse to see, is that Trump is not the outlier. He is the correction. He is the pendulum swinging back. And this time, it is not swinging timidly. It is swinging with force.

    What makes this era a golden age is not merely policy success or economic growth. It is coherence. It is the re-alignment of institutions with the people they purport to serve. It is the re-legitimization of patriotism. It is the death of the idea that to love one’s country is to be blind, or bigoted, or bitter. America, like Rome at its height, is asserting its identity not through conquest, but through clarity. Through excellence. Through example.

    The left has spent years insisting America was founded on sin, sustained by oppression, and systemically incapable of redemption. Trump has answered not with theory, but with action. He has rebuilt the house while others argued about whether it deserved to stand. And now, the house is full again. Full of workers. Full of industry. Full of flags. Full of hope.

    That is what a golden age looks like. And for the first time in a long time, the gold is real.

    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.

    Famous Navy Seal Now De-transitioning – Says He Was Manipulated

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    0
    Katy Blackwood, CC BY-SA 4.0 via Wikimedia Commons

    Former decorated Navy SEAL Chris Beck, who publicly announced his transition to look like a woman in 2013, has now said that this was a life-shattering mistake, and he is de-transitioning back to his biologically male gender.

    Beck, who started going by the name Kirsten, was a poster child of the trans movement and was used aggressively by them to promote and impose their radical agenda in the U.S. military.

    Beck earlier served in the Navy SEALs for 20 years, going on 13 deployments, including with the famed SEAL Team Six.

    According to his speaker bio, he was awarded over 50 citations and medals, including the Bronze Star with valor and the Purple Heart.

    But now Beck calls the trans movement a ‘cult’ that used, manipulated, and propagandized him into making this radical life change.

    He is also speaking out to warn about the devastating effect of the trans agenda on children.

    Beck made his explosive comments during an interview with political commentator Robby Starbuck. 

    Starbuck tweeted that “Navy SEAL Chris Beck came out in 2013 as transgender. @andersoncooper did a special on @cnn about it. His story was used as propaganda to allow trans people in the military and to popularize the issue. Now Chris is ready to expose the truth.”

    The Daily Caller reported:

    He [Beck]told Starbuck that he is “not transgender” and used his confusion as an example of why psychologists should not “push their agenda” onto children. Beck claimed in the interview that it took a one hour long meeting at the Department of Veterans Affairs for him to be recommended hormones, which he has now been off for seven years. He went on to break down the effects of the hormones used for the gender transition on his body.

    Beck was turned into a national figure when he came out as transgender in a 2013 CNN interview with Anderson Cooper. The interview came after he co-wrote the book “Warrior Princess” with psychologist Anne Speckhard. The book detailed him coming out as transgender. He warned viewers in the interview not to believe anything CNN said about him because he claims they “used [him]” and “destroyed [his] life” over the past decade.

    Beck is also extremely concerned about the trans movement’s damaging effects on children.

    The Blaze notes:

    Beck explained the dangers of medical professionals’ “automatic acceptance” of children who have self-diagnosed themselves as transgender. He added that doctors should require “a minimum number of sessions” before allowing children to undergo life-altering hormone therapy treatment or gender-mutilating surgeries.

    “There’s a lot of complications with these surgeries,” Beck noted. “And that’s a part that they don’t really talk about.”

    Beck told Starbuck that he came on the podcast to take “full responsibility” for promoting gender ideology and stated that, at the time, he was “naive.” He explained that he is concerned that children are “being talked into this.”

    “I don’t want this to continue, and I don’t want these kids to get hurt,” Beck stated.

    And this a growing concern, especially as Team Biden is pushing to have taxpayer-funded transition surgeries for kids.

    The Christian Post reports:

    The United States Department of Health and Human Services says that taxpayer funds should be used to cover the cost of body mutilating “gender transition” surgeries for minors. In written responses to Rep. Mary Miller, R-Ill., U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra said that the Biden administration supports using taxpayer dollars to cover the costs of elective body-deforming surgeries on youth, such as mastectomies and vaginoplasties. His responses were submitted Tuesday to the U.S. House Committee on Education and Labor.

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

    Congressional Committee Accuses Hunter Biden Of Lying Under Oath

    By
    Donny Ferguson
    -
    1
    President Joe Biden hugs his family during the 59th Presidential Inauguration ceremony in Washington, Jan. 20, 2021. President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris took the oath of office on the West Front of the U.S. Capitol. (DOD Photo by Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Carlos M. Vazquez II)

    President Joe Biden’s troubled adult son Hunter Biden lied under oath to Congress, which is a prosecutable crime, congressional Republicans accuse in a new release of documents and evidence.

    The U.S. House Ways and Means Committee “voted to release over 100 pages of newly obtained evidence, provided to the Committee by Internal Revenue Service (IRS) whistleblowers Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler, showing Hunter Biden was not truthful during his sworn testimony before Congress on February 28th, 2024,” Committee Republicans announced in a statement.

    “In addition to the evidence showing Hunter Biden’s repeated lies under oath before Congress, the Ways and Means Committee voted to release additional documents that affirm the credibility of the IRS whistleblowers’ sworn testimony and evidence previously released by the Committee, as well as more evidence of the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) obstruction of the IRS investigation into Hunter Biden,” the statement reads.

    “Hunter Biden has shown once again he believes there are two systems of justice in this country – one for his family, and one for everyone else. Not only did Hunter Biden refuse to comply with his initial subpoena until threatened with criminal contempt, but he then came before Congress and lied,” said Committee Chairman Jason Smith (R-MO.) 

    “The Ways and Means Committee’s investigation, and the documents released today, are not part of a personal vendetta against Hunter Biden, but are meant to ensure the equal application of the law,” Smith added.

    Smith then noted if Biden lied under oath, he may be criminally prosecuted.

    “Lying during sworn testimony is a felony offense that the Department of Justice has prosecuted numerous individuals for in recent years, and the American people expect the same accountability for the son of the President of the United States. Hunter Biden’s lies under oath, and obstruction of a congressional investigation into his family’s potential corruption, calls into question other pieces of his testimony. The newly released evidence affirms, once again, the only witnesses who can be trusted to tell the truth in this investigation are the IRS whistleblowers,” said Smith.

    The Committee notes they are releasing:

    Complete versions of communications between Hunter Biden and his business associates, thus showing that previously released IRS agent summaries were accurate. You can find the new material here.

    Evidence of Assistant U.S. Attorney Leslie Wolf informing IRS investigators’ that they were unable to pursue Kevin Morris as a witness in the Hunter Biden investigation after receiving a classified briefing at CIA headquarters. The new evidence shows that despite requests from investigators to understand the reason why they were unable to pursue Kevin Morris as a witness, DOJ never provided investigators with the requested information.

    In a statement, Committee Republicans laid out the alleged lies Biden told while testifying under oath, writing:

    The new evidence indisputably shows Hunter Biden lied to Congress in at least three separate instances during his February 28, 2024 transcribed interview: 

    Lie # 1: “I sent the text to the wrong Zhao”  

    During his deposition, Committee investigators questioned Hunter Biden about the now infamous WhatsApp message he sent to a business associate at the Chinese energy company, CEFC, stating, “I’m sitting here with my father, and we would like to understand why the commitment has not been fulfilled.” In the months that followed, $5 million flowed from CEFC affiliates to companies connected to Hunter and James Biden, the President’s brother.  

    Hunter Biden’s Sworn Testimony: “The Zhao that this is sent to is not the Zhao that was connected to CEFC” and he “had no understanding or even remotely knew what the hell I was even Goddamn talking about.” 

    The Truth: According to phone records of Hunter Biden’s WhatsApp messages released by the Ways and Means Committee today, the President’s son communicated with only one “Zhao” – Raymond Zhao – in that exchange. Not only did the same Zhao respond, but his message indicates he knew exactly what Hunter Biden was talking about, and that Hunter Biden continued to communicate with the same “Zhao” phone number for an additional three months regarding matters related to CEFC. 

    Lie # 2: “Neither of these accounts were under [Hunter Biden’s] control nor affiliated with him”: 

    According to Hunter Biden’s business associate, Devon Archer, he and Hunter Biden were equal owners of Rosemont Seneca Bohai, and that entity was used by both individuals. According to evidence provided by the IRS whistleblowers, Hunter Biden was the beneficial owner of the entity’s associated bank account, which was used to receive Hunter’s salary from Burisma and to receive foreign wires, such as funds allegedly transferred from a Kazakhstani individual through an entity that were then used to purchase a Porsche for Hunter Biden. Congressional investigators questioned Hunter Biden during his February 28th deposition regarding his connection to Rosemont Seneca Bohai, as well as bank accounts associated with the entity.

    Hunter Biden’s Sworn Testimony: Neither Rosemont Seneca Bohai, nor its associated bank accounts, were “under my control nor affiliated with me” and Hunter, “didn’t even know that there was such a thing” in reference to a corporate secretary of the entity. 

    The Truth: Evidence obtained by the Committee and released today from IRS investigator Joseph Ziegler shows otherwise. Not only is there documentation that Hunter Biden was the beneficial owner of a bank account in the name of Rosemont Seneca Bohai,  but the Committee has obtained a signed document where Hunter Biden affirms, “I, Robert Hunter Biden, hereby certify that I am the duly elected, qualified and acting Secretary of Rosemont Seneca Bohai, LLC” in order to enter into a contract on behalf of the entity with Porsche Financial Services.

    Lie # 3: “I’d never pick up the phone and call anybody for a visa”: 

    During his deposition, Committee investigators questioned Hunter Biden regarding what services he provided to Burisma during his tenure on the board of the Ukrainian company. One of the services that Burisma allegedly needed, was work related to obtaining a U.S. visa for the CEO of Burisma. Congressional investigators questioned Hunter Biden under oath regarding his work for Burisma, and his testimony reveals a potential attempt to conceal he was actively using his name and father’s influence to aid foreign nationals in obtaining visas from the U.S. government. 

    Hunter Bidens’ Sworn Testimony: Hunter Biden stated he was unwilling to provide “any work as it related to visas that they needed.” In fact, he stated unequivocally that he’d “never pick up the phone and call anybody for a visa.” 

    The Truth: The Committee has obtained and made public today an email communication between Devon Archer, Hunter Biden, and Ukrainian associates in which, in response to concerns about the revocation of Nikolay Zlochevsky’s, the CEO of Burisma, U.S. visa and the resulting limitations on his foreign travel, Archer stated, “Hunter is checking with Miguel Aleman to see if he can provide cover to Kola on the visa.” “Kola” being Nikolay Zlochevsky. Archer also tells Vadim Pozharskyi to “please send Hunter an email with all Kola’s passport and visa documents and evidence and copy me. We’ll take it from there.” These documents show that Hunter Biden did in fact do work on visa issues. 

    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 from American Liberty News.

    Poll Shows Americans Evenly Split On Sending Trump To Prison. Do You Agree?

    By
    Donny Ferguson
    -
    0
    Image via Pixabay

    A new Associated Press poll finds Americans are almost evenly split on whether former President Donald Trump should be sentenced to prison after being found guilty of falsifying business records in New York.

    “The public is divided over whether Donald Trump should be sentenced to prison for his felony conviction for falsifying business records in the hush money case,” the AP reports. “Opinions on the conviction itself have remained stable in the weeks since the decision was announced on May 30 with nearly half approving of the jury’s decision and about a quarter disapproving. The public is also divided on whether Trump has received fair treatment from the legal system.”

    Trump, convicted in June, is scheduled to be sentenced Sept. 18, just weeks ahead of the November election.  Experts predict Trump will likely receive probation and a fine, but a prison sentence is a distinct possibility.

    The AP/NORC poll, conducted June 20-24, finds 48 percent believe Trump should receive a prison sentence, while 50 percent disagree.  That gap is within the poll’s margin of error, meaning Americans are essentially evenly split.

    Among independent voters, who will decide the election, 50 percent believe Trump should be imprisoned while 46 percent disagree.

    While Americans are split on whether Trump should go to prison, the number who support Trump’s conviction outnumber those who oppose it by nearly a two-to-one margin.

    The poll finds 46 percent of Americans support the jury’s decision to convict Trump, while 27 percent disapprove and 25 percent are unsure.

    Among independents, 32 percent agree with the conviction, 21 percent disagree and 47 percent are unsure.

    The nationwide poll was conducted June 20-24, 2024 using the AmeriSpeak® Panel, the probability-based panel of NORC at the University of Chicago. 

    The poll, using online and telephone interviews using landlines and cell phones, was conducted with 1,088 adults. The margin of sampling error is +/- 4.0 percentage points.

    The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk.

    Amanda Head: Southwest Airlines Ruined Christmas

    By
    Amanda Head
    -
    1

    Nobody expected Southwest Airlines to be the biggest grinch of all this Christmas.

    As a winter storm rolled through much of the United States grounding thousands of airline passengers over the Christmas holidays. While nearly every airline was forced to announce delays and cancellations Southwest airlines was by and far the worst culprit, even drawing ire from the Dept. of Transportation.

    Watch Amanda break down the controversy below:

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

    Vice President Biden Flew Son Hunter On Air Force Two To Close Foreign Business Deals

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    3
    President Joe Biden hugs his family during the 59th Presidential Inauguration ceremony in Washington, Jan. 20, 2021. President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris took the oath of office on the West Front of the U.S. Capitol. (DOD Photo by Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Carlos M. Vazquez II)

    ANALYSIS – Even as the world obsesses over Donald Trump’s latest legal dangers, the walls are slowly closing in on the Biden crime family. And I don’t use the phrase ‘crime family’ often.

    But it’s becoming increasingly clear that Joe Biden used his time as Vice President as a golden opportunity to unlawfully enrich his entire family, often flying his son Hunter on Air Force Two abroad to seal deals.

    In one well-known instance, VP Biden leveraged a billion dollars in U.S. aid to fire the Ukrainian prosecutor investigating the energy firm that employed Hunter.

    In their ongoing investigation into alleged influence peddling involving Biden, members of the House Oversight and Accountability Committee have asked the National Archives and Records Administration for unrestricted access to Biden’s travel aboard the vice-presidential jet, known as Air Force Two, and the VP’s official helicopter, known as Marine Two.

    They want to determine whether the trips aided his son Hunter’s shady foreign business deals.

    House GOP investigators believe Biden, while vice president under Barack Obama, used his power and influence to help his family and a group of associates with foreign business deals involving China, Russia, Ukraine and other countries, worth tens of millions of dollars.

    And there is more evidence to back up their beliefs. Last month, Devon Archer, Hunter’s former business partner, told House investigators the foreign deals were secured by selling the Biden “brand,” essentially, Joe Biden’s position as vice president of the United States.

    “Then-Vice President Joe Biden abused Air Force Two by allowing his son to jet set around the world to sell ‘The Brand’ to enrich the Biden family,” said House Oversight Chairman James Comer.

    “This is yet another example of then-Vice President Biden abusing his public office for his family’s financial gain.”

    More specifically, the Washington Times reported that:

    Lawmakers on the Oversight panel said the president’s son Hunter Biden may have traveled to 15 countries with his father while he was vice president and that during that time, Mr. Biden met in Beijing with his son’s business associate, a Chinese national, while he was on official business.

    “Then Vice-President Biden’s misuse of Air Force Two and Marine Two is indicative of yet another way in which the President has abused his various offices of public trust and wasted taxpayer money to benefit his family’s enterprise, which consisted of nothing more than access to Joe Biden himself,” Oversight lawmakers wrote to U.S. Archivist Colleen Shogan.

    House investigators also believe Biden used numerous aliases to hide his participation in his son’s shady deals. The Times added:

    …Comer also is seeking more than 5,000 White House emails that used aliases for then-Vice President Joseph R. Biden. The National Archives said it is awaiting approval from Mr. Biden and former President Barack Obama before handing them over to Mr. Comer, according to an aide to Mr. Comer.

    White House records show that Mr. Biden used the name Robert L. Peters while serving as vice president. Mr. Biden also disguised his name on emails using the pseudonyms Robin Ware and JRB Ware, a play on his middle name and initials paired with his home state of Delaware.

    Critically, investigators noted a May 26, 2016, White House scheduling email sent to VP Biden ahead of a call with the Ukrainian president, Petro Poroshenko that was also inexplicably sent to his ‘private citizen’ son, Hunter. 

    At the same time, the drug-addicted, unqualified Hunter was earning $100,000 a month as a board member of Ukrainian energy firm Burisma Holdings, which was under investigation for corruption. The U.S. State Department had said Burisma engaged in bribery.

    And in a typical moment of braggadocio, a clueless Biden senior bragged about it. The New York Post reported:

    In a 2018 interview at the Council on Foreign Relations, Biden bragged that he unilaterally withheld a billion dollars in US aid from the Ukrainians to force them to fire Prosecutor-General Viktor Shokin.

    The Ukrainians balked, but Biden gave them an ultimatum: “I looked at them and said, ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.’ Well, son of a bitch. He got fired.”

    Tough guy, that Biden.

    Biden has claimed he demanded Ukraine fire its equivalent of Attorney General because he was corrupt, but we now know the State Department had found that Ukraine had made great strides in dealing with corruption, and Shokin, specifically, was praised in private correspondence.

    The Post added that Devon Archer’s testimony revealed that Burisma executives made the removal of Shokin a top priority and raised it with their hired gun, Hunter.

    Archer reportedly described how Burisma officials told Hunter of the importance of neutralizing Shokin, and how “a call to Washington” was made in response. The call was of course to Dad.

    And that’s what House investigators are hoping to prove. The Obama-Biden White House call logs, emails, and flight schedules are all part of the mounting evidence against Joe Biden.

    Amanda Head: Late Night TV Hits Rock Bottom

    By
    Amanda Head
    -
    3

    Things are going downhill at an alarming rate…

    Watch Amanda explain the situation below:

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

    Inside DOGE: Elon Musk’s Bold Move To Rewiring Federal Thinking

    By
    Alex Muse
    -
    1
    Screenshot via X [Credit: @amuse]

    In the history of American bureaucracy, few ideas have carried the sting of satire and the force of reform as powerfully as Steve Davis’s $1 credit card limit. It is a solution so blunt, so absurd on its face, that only a government so accustomed to inertia could have missed it for decades. And yet, here it is, at the center of a sprawling audit by the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, that has, in just seven weeks, eliminated or disabled 470,000 federal charge cards across thirty agencies. The origin of this initiative reveals more than cleverness or thrift. It reflects a new attitude, one that insists the machinery of government need not be calcified. The federal workforce, long derided as passive and obstructionist, is now being challenged to solve problems, not explain why they cannot be solved. This, more than any tally of dollars saved, may be DOGE’s greatest achievement.

    When Elon Musk assumed control of DOGE under President Trump’s second administration, he brought with him an instinct for disruption. But disruption, as many reformers have learned, is often easier said than done. Take federal credit cards. There were, as of early 2025, roughly 4.6 million active accounts across the federal government, while the civilian workforce comprised fewer than 3 million employees. Even the most charitable reading suggests gross redundancy. More cynical observers see potential for abuse. DOGE asked the obvious question: why so many cards? The initial impulse was to cancel them outright. But as is often the case in government, legality is not aligned with simplicity.

    Enter Steve Davis. Known for his austere management style and history with Musk-led enterprises, Davis encountered legal counsel who informed him that mass cancellation would breach existing contracts, violate administrative rules, and risk judicial entanglement. Most would stop there. But Davis, adhering to Musk’s ethos of first-principles thinking, chose another route. If the cards could not be canceled, could they be rendered functionally useless? Yes. Set their limits to $1.

    This workaround achieved in days what years of audits and Inspector General warnings had not. The cards remained technically active, sidestepping the legal landmines of cancellation, but were practically neutered. The act was swift, surgical, and reversible. It allowed agencies to petition for exemptions in cases of genuine operational need, but forced every cardholder and department head to justify the existence of each card. Waste thrives in opacity. The $1 cap turned on the lights.

    Naturally, the immediate reaction inside many agencies was panic. At the National Park Service, staff could not process trash removal contracts. At the FDA, scientific research paused as laboratories found themselves unable to order reagents. At the Department of Defense, travel for civilian personnel ground to a halt. Critics likened it to a shutdown, albeit without furloughs. Others, more charitable, described it as a stress test. And indeed, that is precisely what it was: a large-scale audit conducted not by paper trails and desk reviews, but by rendering all purchases impossible and observing who protested, why, and with what justification.

    This approach reflects a deeper philosophical question. What is government for? Is it a perpetuator of routine, or a servant of necessity? The DOGE initiative, in its credit card audit, insisted that nothing in government spending ought to be assumed sacred or automatic. Every purchase, every expense, must be rooted in mission-critical need. And for that to happen, a culture shift must occur, not merely in policy, but in mindset. The federal worker must no longer be an apologist for the status quo, but an agent of reform.

    Remarkably, this message has found traction. Inside the agencies affected by the freeze, DOGE has reported a surge in what one official described as “constructive dissent.” Civil servants who once reflexively recited reasons for inaction are now offering alternative mechanisms, revised workflows, and digital solutions. One employee at the Department of Agriculture proposed consolidating regional office supply chains after realizing that over a dozen separate cardholders were purchasing duplicative items within the same week. A NOAA field team discovered it could pool resources for bulk procurement, saving money and reducing redundancy. These are not acts of whistleblowing or radical restructuring. They are small, localized acts of efficiency, and they matter.

    Critics argue that these are marginal gains and that the real drivers of federal bloat lie elsewhere: entitlement spending, defense procurement, or healthcare subsidies. And they are not wrong. But they miss the point. DOGE’s $1 limit was not about accounting minutiae, it was about psychology. In a system where inertia reigns, a symbolic shock is often the necessary prelude to substantive reform. The act of asking why, why this card, why this purchase, why this employee, forces a reappraisal that scales. Culture, not just cost, was the target.

    There is a danger here, of course. Symbolism can become performance, and austerity can become vanity. If agencies are deprived of necessary tools for the sake of headlines, then reform becomes sabotage. This is why the $1 policy included an appeals process, a mechanism for restoring functionality where needed. In a philosophical sense, this is the principle of proportionality applied to public finance: restrictions should be commensurate with the likelihood of abuse, and reversible upon demonstration of legitimate need.

    DOGE’s broader audit, still underway, has now expanded to cover nearly thirty agencies. It is not simply cutting cards. It is classifying them, comparing issuance practices, flagging statistical anomalies, and building a federal dashboard of real-time usage. This is not glamorous work. There are no ribbon-cuttings, no legacy-defining achievements. But it is the marrow of good governance. As Aristotle noted, excellence is not an act, but a habit. The DOGE team has adopted a habit of scrutiny. And that habit, when instilled in the civil service, is a kind of virtue.

    Here we arrive at the most profound implication. What if the federal workforce is not inherently wasteful or cynical, but simply trapped in a system that rewards compliance over creativity? What if, when given both the mandate and the moral permission to think, civil servants become problem solvers? The $1 limit policy is, in this light, less a budgetary tool than a pedagogical one. It teaches. It asks employees to imagine how their department might function if every dollar mattered, and to act accordingly.

    In a bureaucratic culture where the phrase “we can’t do that” serves as both shield and apology, DOGE has introduced a new mantra: try. Try to find the workaround. Try to reimagine procurement. Try to do more with less. This shift may not register on a spreadsheet. It may not win an election. But it rehumanizes the federal workforce. It treats them not as drones executing policy, but as intelligent actors capable of judgment, reform, and even invention.

    The future of DOGE will no doubt face resistance. Unions, entrenched bureaucrats, and political opponents will argue it oversteps or misunderstands the delicate machinery of governance. Some of that criticism will be valid. But what cannot be denied is that DOGE has already achieved something rare: it has made federal workers think differently. It has shown that even the most byzantine of systems contains levers for change—if one is willing to pull them.

    The $1 card limit is not a policy; it is a parable. It tells us that in the face of complexity, simplicity is a virtue. That in the face of inertia, audacity has a place. And that in the face of sprawling bureaucracies, sometimes the best way to fix the machine is to unplug it and see who calls to complain. That is when the real work begins.

    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.

    READ NEXT: Federal Judge Blocks Hugely Popular Trump-Backed Reform

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