Opinion

Home Opinion

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

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.

Investigators Warn FBI Director Faces Charge For Hiding Biden Bribery Memo

8

The top Republican investigators in the House and Senate warn America may face a constitutional crisis, with the Director of the FBI facing possible Contempt of Congress charges for refusing to turn over a government document alleging a foreign national offered a $5 million bribe to then-Vice-President Joe Biden.

Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and House Committee on Oversight and Accountability Chairman James Comer (R-KY) blasted FBI Director Christopher Wray for defying a congressional subpoena for an unclassified record “alleging a criminal scheme involving then-Vice President Joe Biden and a foreign national.” 

“The document, an FBI-generated FD-1023 form, allegedly details an arrangement involving an exchange of money for policy decisions. In a new letter to Director Wray, Comer warns that if the FBI fails to produce the record by May 30, 2023, the Oversight Committee will initiate contempt of Congress proceedings,” Grassley reports in a statement. 

“The FBI has continued to tie itself in knots to ignore a legitimate subpoena from Congress, which has a constitutional duty of oversight. The Bureau’s developed a serious reputation problem through its spate of failures and overreach, and leadership is doing it no favors by attempting to stiff-arm Congress.  The FBI knows exactly what document Chairman Comer and I are seeking, and if they know us at all, they know we will get it, one way or another. If FBI leadership truly cares about protecting the agency’s reputation, they’d cooperate. These needless delays only harm the Bureau,” Grassley said.

“The FBI’s refusal to provide this single document is obstructionist. Whistleblower disclosures that Joe Biden may have been involved in a criminal bribery scheme as Vice President track closely with what we are seeing in our investigation into the Biden family’s influence peddling schemes. Congress and the American people need to know what, if anything, the FBI did to verify the allegations contained within this record. If Director Wray refuses to hand over this unclassified record, the Oversight Committee will begin contempt of Congress proceedings,” Comer said.

“Comer issued a subpoena for the unclassified FBI record on May 3, 2023 with a return date of May 10, 2023. After the FBI failed to produce the record, Oversight Committee counsel have attended two in-person meetings with FBI officials where they again refused to produce the FD-1023 form or offer any reasonable accommodation that would allow the Committee to review the document,” Grassley reports.

On May 16, 2023, Grassley and Comer requested a phone call with Director Wray to discuss the subpoena, but despite repeated requests the FBI has not scheduled a phone call.

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

House Investigating Democrats Who Fraudulently Obtained Private Military Records of GOP Candidates

6

INVESTIGATION – As I noted in my late January PDB, a ‘Democrat Colluded With Air Force Against Black Female GOP Candidate.’ 

In that case, the Air Force took the fall for the release of the congressional candidate’s military record, blaming “a junior individual [who] didn’t follow proper procedures.”

However, Jennifer-Ruth Green, a Republican, continues to blame U.S. Rep. Frank Mrvan and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) for illegally obtaining and releasing the information through corrupt Air Force personnel to damage her campaign in the weeks leading up to the November election.

The release despicably included information about a sexual assault Green had suffered while serving in Iraq.

But, it seems there is much more to the story.

We now learn she wasn’t the only target of the corrupt DCCC.

We also learn that a Democrat-linked consulting and research firm called ‘Due Diligence Group’ (DDG) has been at the center of a partisan effort to improperly, and likely illegally, obtain the service records of at least 11 service members via fraudulent SF-180 requests.

According to data from OpenSecrets.org, the DCCC has paid more than $100,000 to DDG since 2021.

SF-180s are used by veterans, authorized legal recipients and next of kin to legally obtain information from military personnel records. 

Third-party requests require the service member to authorize their request with their signature.

In these 11 cases, it is clear the service members did not provide their authorization.

Just the News reports:

In an unprecedented breach, the Air Force improperly released to a research firm tied to Democrats’ congressional campaign arm the confidential personnel files of eleven members of the military, including one involving a retired lieutenant colonel running for office as a Republican that detailed how she had been sexually assaulted in the Air Force, Congress has been told.

And the House Armed Services and Oversight committee are demanding answers. The news outlet continues:

[In a February 13 letter], House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mike Rogers and House Oversight and Accountability Committee Chairman James Comer are demanding that Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin explain how he will prevent future breaches of military members’ private information while pressing to know if there will be criminal prosecutions.

Just the News further reports on the letter:

“The Office of the Secretary of the Air Force (OSAF) has informed the Committee that it released 11 individuals’ records over a 14-month period from October 2021-December 2022 to a private research firm which allegedly misrepresented itself in order to obtain access to the personnel records without authorization or consent.” 

Rogers and Comer wrote that the release of other service members’ personal information highlights “not only the inadequacy of procedures to secure military personnel files, but also raises concerning questions of possible illicit motive or political partisanship.”

“This conduct by the Air Force is, at a minimum, unacceptable,” they added, “The conduct by the research firm is quite possibly criminal.”

Just the News reported that Rogers told the outlet that much more needs to be investigated.  

Rogers stated:“It’s abhorrent that a Democrat-aligned firm would do something so despicable as fraudulently obtaining service records. Chairman James Comer and I pressed the Department of Defense for answers on this egregious breach.”

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

Cruz Drops Bombshell Bill to Stop Scheme That Uses Taxpayer Funds to Push Companies into Woke Socialism

1
Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America,

The federal government could no longer use taxpayer-funded retirement accounts to push companies to adopt leftist political policies, under a new bill from U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz.

The move counters a recent strategy by leftist radicals to gain control over the voting shares of publicly-held corporations, then vote in radical leftist policies that push “woke” social goals and divert billions in cash to activist groups.

One of the biggest shareholders in many corporations are retirement funds held by and managed for federal employees by BlackRock, a far-left, multinational hedge fund.

Cruz has introduced the Stop TSP ESG Act, which “will prevent companies that manage investment funds held in federal employee retirement accounts from using those holdings to vote in corporate shareholder meetings to force leftist Environmental, Social, Governance (ESG) and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) policies onto private sector businesses.”

Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.) is co-sponsoring the bill in the Senate. 

Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) previously introduced companion legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives.

“BlackRock is able to leverage its position as the fund manager to vote in shareholder meetings and to force publicly traded companies to adopt ESG and DEI policies, even if doing so adversely affects investor value. As such, BlackRock prioritizes its political agenda over the interests of employees and retirees who are seeking to maximize their return on investment,” a statement from Cruz’s office reads.

 “I am proud to join Congressman Buck and sponsor this legislation in the Senate to hold investment fund managers accountable and ensure they do not misuse their position as a fiduciary to advance an agenda contrary to the interests of their investors,” said Cruz.

“As the managing entity of TSP, BlackRock is leveraging the financial weight of the federal retirement system to push their woke ESG and DEI ideology through other peoples’ investments. BlackRock’s manipulation and brazen politicization of federal retirement accounts is wrong and should not be tolerated,” said Cruz.

“For years, BlackRock has been leveraging taxpayer money to force unwilling businesses to accept ESG and DEI policies. Through its position as the manager of the federal Thrift Savings Plan, BlackRock has abused public capital to push a radical agenda and censor conservative media,” said Buck.

 “Woke Wall Street has been using the federal Thrift Savings Plan to force a radical left-wing agenda on the country. That’s a violation of their fiduciary duty and the basic precepts of democracy. Policy should be made in Congress, not BlackRock’s C-Suite,” said Will Hild, Executive Director at Consumers’ Research.

“The Stop TSP ESG Act is an important step in stopping the radical ESG agenda by protecting TSP account holders. BlackRock CEO Larry Fink admits to ‘forcing behaviors.’ Shareholders may be unknowingly supporting companies that disparage their values as proxy voting decisions are made by these radicals. Thank you, Rep. Buck, for introducing this legislation,” said Penny Nance, CEO and President of Concerned Women for America Legislative Action Committee.

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

Feeling ‘Trans’ Disproportionately Affects This Group: Poll

5
Joe Biden via Gage Skidmore Flickr

ANALYSIS – The bizarre transgender fad being pushed by the far left on our nation’s children, and globally, isn’t very diverse. In America it mostly affects a specific type of person. 

According to a recent survey by a pro-transgender support group, that type of person is primarily a young white teenager, who is very smart but has a history of mental illness, and/or emotional issues.

The survey could have added (but did not), that they are likely liberal, middle class, and might drive a Prius.

This, according to a survey of parents who believed their children had ‘rapid onset gender dysphoria.’ The poll was conducted by Parents of ROGD kids.com, which has a support group for families with gender dysphoric children.

The Christian Post reports:

The survey results, which collected responses over nearly four years, were compiled into a report by website creator Suzanna Diaz and J. Michael Bailey of Northwestern University’s Department of Psychology on Wednesday. The 1,774 responses to the survey were collected from Dec. 1, 2017, through Oct. 22, 2021.

Examining the demographics of youth who developed rapid onset gender dysphoria reveals that three-quarters of the children (75%) were female, while just 25% were male. Additionally, the overwhelming majority (78.9%) were of European descent, while much smaller shares were ethnically mixed (16.2%), Asian (2.8%), Indigenous (0.8%), African American (0.6%), Middle Eastern and East Indian (0.4%).

The results of the survey measured the average age when children first experience gender dysphoria as 14.8 years old. The report details how, on average, girls began to develop gender dysphoria at 14.1 years, while boys were an average of 16 years old when they first began to experience discomfort with their sex.

Significantly, a majority of parents (57%) said their gender dysphoric children had a history of “mental health issues.” Almost 60 percent of parents of girls were more likely to report a mental health history in their children.

Fifty-one percent of the parents of boys reported mental health issues in their kids.

Not surprisingly, on average, mental health issues first began to arise almost four years before gender dysphoria appeared.

So, interestingly, 75 percent of Americans who suddenly think they are trans are young female teenagers, and almost 80 percent are of white European heritage. Almost 60 percent of the girls and half the boys have a history of other mental illnesses.

So much for ‘trans diversity’ in America.

The Post continued:

The most common mental health issues experienced by females with gender dysphoria were anxiety (47.3%), depression (33.2%), difficulty socializing with peers (26.5%) and difficulty coping with stressful situations in general (23.2%). Among males, the most frequently reported mental health issues included anxiety (35.2%), difficulty socializing with peers (28.1%), depression (25.1%) and difficulty coping with stressful situations in general (19.2%).

Of those parents who answered a question about whether they felt pressure from a “gender clinic or specialist” to ‘transition’ their child to the opposite sex, just over half (51.8%) reported experiencing pressure. 

An additional 23.6% said they were “unsure” if they felt pressured.

One could argue that if you don’t know, you probably were.

And let’s be clear, physically and medically ‘transitioning’ kids (or anyone) to the opposite sex is a horrific process.

As The Post explains, it involves a life-long regimen of hormones and extended genital mutilation surgeries.

The puberty blockers for teens have side effects such as “osteoporosis, mood disorders, seizures, cognitive impairment.

When combined with cross-sex hormones, they can cause “sterility.”

Potential long-term impacts of cross-sex hormones include “an increased risk of heart attacks, stroke, diabetes, blood clots and cancers.”

And then there are the sex-change surgeries which “include chemical and surgical castration, double mastectomies on girls, orchiectomy (removing testicles) for boys, the construction of a fake vagina (vaginoplasty) for boys, and removal of skin and tissue from girls’ forearms or thighs to create a fake, flaccid penis that doesn’t function.”

All this for mostly white, ‘exceptionally intelligent,’ young teenage girls, with histories of mental illness. 

Adding to the argument that social pressure pushes vulnerable confused kids to identify as something other than heterosexual, the share of the American population ‘identifying’ as LGBT has doubled over the past decade as the rabid pro-LGBT agenda has intensified.

According to a new Gallup survey, the latest Generation Z is more likely than older Americans to identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender or something “other” than straight. 

The Christian Post earlier reported:

The share of Americans who identify as LGBT reached a record of 7.2% in 2022 after hitting 7.1% in 2021, up from 5.6% in 2020 and 3.5% in 2012, the year Gallup began collecting data on LGBT identification.

Of course, those on the left will argue that society’s greater acceptance of alternative sexuality has simply allowed more kids to come out of the closet. And maybe there is some validity to that.

But how many are simply confused and vulnerable children looking for a different type of acceptance?

There is also a not-so-fine line between being ‘accepted’ and being pushed.

And the left, the establishment media, and now the deranged transgender medical industry, are doing a lot of pushing.

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

Surge In Youth Mob Violence Reported Across US

7
Police image via Pixabay free images

ANALYSIS – The aftershocks from radical leftist movements, and the corresponding soft-on-crime approach of prosecutors across the country, is largely to blame for the current wave of lawlessness in many American cities.

Sadly, it appears that most of the crime is being committed by mobs of teenagers in disadvantaged communities.

I have recently written about the skyrocketing murder rate and carjackings in our nation’s capital here. I didn’t note then that much of that violent crime in Washington, D.C. is committed by young people. Some as young as 13.

But frightening incidents of youth-led mob violence in two other cities graphically show how bad things really are.

The Blaze reported that in what may be America’s most violent city: “Scores of thugs swarmed two Memphis gas stations over the weekend, stealing thousands of dollars of merchandise and destroying property. Looters also hit a 53-foot FedEx semi-trailer, stealing multiple packages.”

Murders in Memphis are up 77% this year and on track to set an all-time city record.

Some blame Steve Mulroy the city’s new soft-on crime Democrat district attorney, others, such as the mayor, blame soft-on crime courts. I would say it is likely both.

Whichever is most to blame, James Davis, owner of L.R. Clothier, whose business was broken into early Sunday morning, said: “What this says to me is that people don’t fear any repercussions of their actions.”

And that sums it up, as can be seen in the video below.

The Blaze continued:

Roughly $2,000 of items were stolen from the Exxon at 3483 Airways Boulevard. Over $15,000 of merchandise was taken from the Fill-N-Go gas station at 3084 South Third Street just hours later, where a clerk reported having a rifle pointed at him by a suspect. The mob is estimated to have inflicted $9,000 in damage at the second location.

Footage of one of the incidents shows a mob of looters, some masked and others bare faced, ransacking a gas station and absconding with everything from candy to an electric sign. One hooded figure taking his time deciding which chocolate bars to load into his sagging pants can be seen carrying around a rifle. Another masked figure grabbing a handful of loot appears to be an adolescent girl.

Clerks and paying customers look on in disbelief as the looters pilfer without any fear of consequence.

The outlet added: “In what appears to have been a coordinated effort, drivers blocked a FedEx truck in the middle of Riverport Road and Mallory Avenue around 8:30 p.m., affording masked men an opportunity to break into the trailer and steal multiple packages.”

But as scary as this ‘purge’ like behavior is in Memphis (referring to the movies where all crime, including murder, is allowed one day a year), the recent incident in Las Vegas is even worse.

There a teenage boy, Jonathan Lewis Jr., was brutally beaten to death by 15 teens in broad daylight.

Video of the brutal attack emerged on social media last week, showing the teen being savagely pummeled as he tried to run away.

[His father, Jonathan] Lewis Sr. said he believes the deadly onslaught began after “Jonathan stood up for one of his smaller friends,” according to the Las Vegas Review-Journal.

“A couple (of people) attacked him, and they weren’t able to hurt him enough, and they all attacked him at once,” the dad stated.

Lewis Sr. remembered his son as a “loving, giving, kind, fierce young man who loved community and caring for others.” He added that “his son was an aspiring artist who was considering joining the military like his grandfather – who served in the U.S. Navy.”

Another article in The Blaze noted that:

While the victim’s family tries to process his death, others are puzzling over why this violent episode has not elicited the kind of national response other racially dichotomous incidents have in recent years.

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

New FBI Records Reveal Warnings About Suspicious Individual Before Sniper Attack On Trump

0

A stash of newly-released documents reveal FBI, Secret Service and other officials noted a suspicious person carrying bags and scouting security measures in the hours before a sniper attempted to kill President Donald Trump in Butler, Penn., but no one seems to have taken any action to investigate.

The non-profit public interest law firm Judicial Watch announced in a statement it “forced the release of 37 heavily redacted pages from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit revealing that law enforcement personnel broadcast radio warnings about an ‘unknown male acting suspiciously’ prior to the attempted assassination of then-candidate Donald Trump at a July 13, 2024, rally in Butler, PA. These are the first records the FBI has released about the Butler assassination attempt on Trump.”

“These documents raise troubling new questions about Secret Service failures to protect President Trump.  And it shouldn’t have taken years and a federal lawsuit to get this basic FBI material about the near assassination of President Trump,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said.

Judicial Watch reports it “filed the July 2025 lawsuit after the FBI failed to respond to a July 2024 FOIA request (Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:25-cv-02216)). Judicial Watch asked for:”

All records, including but not limited to, investigative reports, interview summaries (Forms 1023), letterhead memoranda, photos, audio/visual recordings, database inquiries, interagency communications, and any other records, whether contained in the Central Records System or cross-referenced files, related to Thomas Matthew Crooks, born September 20, 2003 in Butler Township, PA and died on July 13, 2024, who attempted the assassination of former President Donald Trump on July 13, 2024.

All records of communication in any form, including but not limited to emails, text messages, encrypted app communications and voice recordings, between FBI officials and/or FBI sources, contractors, and assets on the one hand, and Thomas Matthew Crooks on the other hand.

Judicial Watch reports its “records include a July 16, 2024, ‘FD-302’ investigative report that states that on the day of the shooting:”

Prior to the start of the shooting, [Redacted] received reports over the radio about an unknown male acting suspiciously. The unknown male had bags and was wearing a gray T-shirt with “Demolition Ranch” written on the front of it. One report included the unknown male looking at a law enforcement sniper position. Several operators were communicating information about the unknown male back and forth over the radio–including to/from Command, to the Secret Service, to PSP [PA State Police], to “everybody.”

Judicial Watch’s statement reports:

A July 15 electronic communication titled “Opening EC for Investigation of Thomas Matthew Crooks” that launched the FBI investigation of Thomas Crooks notes that one purpose of the investigation, given that Crooks himself was killed by Secret Service agents, was to determine “the subject’s motivation and to identify if there were any co-conspirators.” 

A July 14 investigative report describes an unidentified acquaintance of Thomas Crooks and his family, the acquaintance indicated that sometime between May and June 2024, Crooks “was dehydrated and needed to be taken to the hospital.” It continued, “[Redacted] stated that she thought it was strange that [redacted] did not take him to the hospital themselves.” 

A July 16 electronic communication states that on the previous day, the FBI returned a flip phone seized as evidence in their investigation of Crooks, and that that “Lead is fully covered.”

A July 16 report notes that on the previous day a person who was apparently a neighbor, described the Crooks family as “normal, nice people” and that Crooks “seemed like a normal dorky kid.”

A July 16 electronic communication details that acting on a tip, sent to the FBI regarding a “concerning” Facebook post regarding Crooks’ attempted assassination of Trump:

Facebook “Damn, bad shot. Would have done the world a service” and another comment on the original post “We should watched his ficking brains brains blown away.” The tipster also provided the Facebook page that posted this was [redacted]. 

A July 16 electronic communication indicates that a business card was located at the crime scene of Trump’s attempted assassination, and the person associated with it was investigated, although nothing derogatory about that individual was identified in law enforcement records. An interview of that individual was recommended.

A July 16 interview report states that investigators talked with an individual who had attended the Butler rally:

[Redacted] recalled that approximately 5 minutes after the shots were fired, a light silver Subaru Hatchback sped past her and almost struck her. [Redacted] didn’t remember the vehicle having any stickers or distinct markings. [Redacted] didn’t get a look at the license plate, but believed the driver to be an older white male with short hair and tan skin. [Redacted] saw the Subaru in the parking lot near houses specifically a brown house with a pool. The vehicle departed the parking lot making a sharp right turn near the old buildings.

[Redacted] was with [redacted] in the parking lot and observed the vehicle too. [Redacted] described the vehicle as a 2017 silver Subaru Forester…. [Redacted] noted the terrain was too rough to drive at the rate of speed the Subaru was doing. [Redacted] thought the incident with the vehicle occurred maybe 10 minutes after the shooting.

A July 16 interview report details the observations of a member of the Saxonburg Police Department who was also a member of the Butler Emergency Services Unit:

[Redacted] was on the counter assault team. His position was in the turret inside the armor vehicle next to the barns behind the stage. [Redacted] stated sniper teams called out and sent photos of a suspicious person with a range finder. [Redacted] stated he watched a guy fitting the description walking from the water tower to the stage area and out of view. He did not see anything on the individual.

[Redacted] stated prior to anything happening he saw four people one child walking away from the AGR [American Glass Research] building towards the houses then two units took off in the direction of where the shooter was later found. A call came out over the radio of a long gun on the roof. Shortly after shots started going off. [Redacted] rode in the armor behind the tents near the stage, but did not ever have a view of the roof where the shooter was. [Redacted] ran out of the armor vehicle with a ladder to AGR and was told they didn’t need any more guys on the roof. So he came back and held security for a medic working on the deceased individual. The Secret Service then took over the tent.

In a July 16 interview summary of an individual who had attended the Butler rally:

[S]he noticed a white male with dark hair interacting with a uniformed law enforcement officer. They both were seen looking at two open windows of the property/building adjacent to the AGR Building. The white male told the officer that those windows were not supposed to be open. [Redacted] saw the windows that appeared to be opened from the inside. As the officer walked around towards the other side of the building, the white male stood on the side where the windows were facing towards the event/stage.  

Shortly thereafter, at approximately some time after 6PM, she heard another white male yell the following, “He’s got a gun, everybody run!” This white male appeared to be in his late [redacted] who was seen wearing a white shirt, who had dark colored hair and a [redacted]. She remembered seeing a “panicked” look on his face. After he yelled, [redacted] heard six gunshots that sounded like they came from the two open windows. She took [redacted] and ran towards the vehicle along with many others from the crowd. She lost [redacted] in the crowd but continued running towards the vehicle with [redacted] and another white male who helped with getting [redacted] to the vehicle. She eventually located [redacted] with the help of the same male.

She recalled seeing the law enforcement officer wearing a brown/tan uniform but she did not see the patch.

When she returned to the vehicle, she recalled seeing the Suburban still parked behind her with no occupants inside. She departed the scene shortly thereafter.

After reflection, [Redacted] thought the security outside of the fence line was a concern because there was a lot of open access. She did not see anybody screening individuals near or outside the fence line.

[Redacted] told agents that she does not support conspiracy theorist or is one but she wanted to provide this information to investigators just in case it would help with the investigation.

A July 16 interview report details the observations of a member of the Slippery Rock Police Department who was also a member of the Butler Emergency Services Unit:

Once Trump started to move toward the stage, [redacted] and the Bravo squad were prepared to move in the armored vehicle. At that time, a report came in over the radio stating there was a male on one of the roofs ([redacted] was not sure which roof) and that the male had a long gun.

Almost immediately after the report came over the radio, [redacted] heard several gunshots. [Redacted] was not sure how many, possibly seven or eight shots. The Bravo squad then responded in the armored vehicle to the grand stand. When they arrived, they exited the armored vehicle and pushed up the grand stand. They were there briefly, attempting to determine what was happening, and then pulled back. At that time, [Redacted] observed a male on the ground with a gun shot wound to his chest. The team then formed a tight perimeter around the medics as they addressed the injured male.

The Secret Service then requested a tactical team to provide security at the Butler Hospital. [Redacted] and three other operators drove the armored vehicle to the hospital and formed a hard perimeter around the outside of the hospital and the helicopter landing pad. [Redacted] stayed there until they “took Donald Trump out.”

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

How Trump’s Drug Plan Saves Billions And Why Mark Cuban Is On Board

0

Americans have been getting ripped off. That is not hyperbole, nor a populist refrain, but a blunt statement of economic reality. The average American pays more for prescription drugs than any other patient in the developed world. This is not a function of greater access, higher quality, or more innovation. It is a product of a system that has, for decades, allowed foreign governments to underpay for medicine while forcing Americans to pick up the tab.

How did we arrive here? The answer is simple, if depressing: the United States accounts for less than five percent of the global population, yet pharmaceutical companies derive nearly three-quarters of their global profits from the American market. Foreign nations, through centralized health systems and price controls, bargain down the price of medicines. Drug manufacturers accept those lower prices because they know they can make up the shortfall in the United States. That is, in effect, a transfer of wealth from the American sick to the foreign healthy.

President Trump has had enough. On May 12, 2025, he signed an Executive Order resurrecting and expanding upon a policy initiative from his first term: the Most-Favored-Nation (MFN) pricing model. In his first term, the MFN model focused on Medicare Part B drugs, those administered in clinical settings, and proposed that the US would pay no more than the lowest price paid by a comparable country. That version was blocked by the courts in 2021 due to procedural issues and was quickly abandoned by the Biden administration. The 2025 version not only revives the core concept but also broadens its scope significantly. It retains the pricing benchmark based on peer nations while adding a novel direct-to-consumer purchasing mechanism. This allows patients to bypass pharmacy benefit managers entirely and buy drugs directly from manufacturers at MFN prices. The new policy thus marries institutional price reform with individual consumer empowerment, expanding the ambition and reach of Trump’s original plan.

Critics, as always, are quick to object. They warn that drug manufacturers will simply stop selling in the US or that research and development will dry up. Some even suggest that international reference pricing is a form of price-fixing by another name. These concerns deserve serious consideration. But they do not outweigh the manifest injustice of the status quo, nor do they erase the practical and moral urgency of reform.

First, consider the structure of the order itself. The MFN model applies immediately to Medicare Part B drugs, those administered in doctors’ offices, often the most expensive and specialized. Trump has instructed the Secretary of Health and Human Services to set price targets within 30 days and deliver measurable results within six months. If pharmaceutical companies fail to comply, the administration will take further action: drug importation from allied nations, penalties on noncompliant firms, and antitrust enforcement through the FTC targeting anti-competitive practices like patent abuse.

Second, the Executive Order proposes a direct-to-consumer mechanism, allowing American patients to buy drugs from manufacturers at international prices, bypassing the profit-hungry middlemen known as pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs). This proposal reflects an economic reality too long ignored: the price of a drug is not set by market forces but by negotiated distortions, rebates, and arbitrage. By cutting out the layers of rent-seeking intermediaries, the Trump administration aims to restore both transparency and affordability.

On this point, perhaps the most surprising endorsement came from Mark Cuban who actively campaigned against the president supporting Kamala Harris’s failed White House bid. Cuban has emerged in recent years as one of the fiercest critics of PBMs in the pharmaceutical supply chain. Through his Cost Plus Drug Company, Cuban has championed a model that eliminates PBMs entirely, selling generic drugs directly to consumers at a fixed markup. He sees PBMs not as neutral facilitators, but as parasites, entities that profit not from creating value, but from distorting it.

In an X post on April 16, 2025, Cuban praised Trump’s Executive Order on healthcare and in particular, drug pricing by explaining how it could save hundreds of billions of dollars. His enthusiasm was not just theoretical. He outlined six specific reforms targeting PBM practices and emphasized that the EO’s direct-to-consumer mechanism aligns with the very business model he has built. For Cuban, this is not about politics, but principle. If Americans can bypass PBMs and purchase drugs at MFN prices, the savings could be transformative.

Cuban has long called for transparency in PBM contracts, elimination of specialty tiers, and reform of rebate structures that inflate drug prices. These are the same structural defects the EO seeks to address. The alignment between Trump’s policy and Cuban’s advocacy is more than accidental. It reflects a growing consensus that PBMs have become a market failure in themselves, distorting prices and blocking access in pursuit of opaque profits.

That Trump and Cuban, two men with vastly different public personas, can agree on this solution is a testament to its power. The issue of drug pricing, once mired in partisan clichés, is now the battleground for real reform. Cuban’s support underscores the seriousness of the EO. It is not simply a gesture, but a genuine effort to untangle the knotted system that has left so many Americans paying so much, for so little.

Opponents cite legal precedent. Indeed, a similar MFN policy was blocked by federal courts in 2021. The Biden administration quickly shelved the idea, preferring not to test its legal authority. But legal difficulty is not legal impossibility. Trump’s new Executive Order is crafted more carefully, with an expanded evidentiary record and administrative justification. Implementation will no doubt be litigated, but the constitutional structure gives the executive branch discretion over how Medicare reimburses for services. Provided the process adheres to administrative law, the courts may well uphold it.

Let us confront the core objection head-on: that price controls reduce innovation. This concern is not frivolous. America leads the world in pharmaceutical innovation precisely because it has, historically, paid the price. The profits derived from the US market fund research labs from Basel to Boston. But this global good comes at a local cost, one that is becoming unbearable.

What Trump offers is not an end to pharmaceutical profitability, but an insistence on proportionality. If research and development are a global public good, then the funding of that good should not be extracted primarily from one nation. Let the Germans and the French and the Canadians contribute more. Let them pay their share. And let the American patient, who already shoulders more than enough, get some relief.

Consider the counterfactual: suppose the MFN policy were in place ten years ago. American taxpayers might have saved hundreds of billions of dollars. Lower out-of-pocket costs would have meant better medication adherence, fewer medical complications, and a healthier, more productive citizenry. That is not a theoretical hope but an economic projection rooted in well-documented health economics. The US spends more per capita on health care than any other country, and drug prices are a major contributor. The MFN model begins to correct that imbalance.

To be sure, implementation challenges remain. Drugmakers may respond by raising prices in foreign countries, undermining the benchmark. The direct purchasing mechanism may be slow to launch, hampered by logistics, safety protocols, or bureaucratic inertia. But these are not arguments against reform, only reminders that reform must be executed with competence.

Trump’s order also calls out foreign governments for their own price manipulation. The US Trade Representative is directed to push back against discriminatory pricing policies abroad. In effect, the administration is making clear: if you want access to the American market, you must stop freeloading off the American consumer. This is economic diplomacy at its most justified.

The pharmaceutical lobby will fight this tooth and nail. Already, industry stocks surged after the EO’s announcement, a signal that insiders believe implementation may be delayed or diluted. But if the Trump administration can muster the will to enforce the order, the effects will be historic. It would mark the first time in decades that the US government sided squarely with the American patient over the multinational drug cartel.

No other president has dared confront this imbalance so directly. Democrats have talked about drug pricing reform for years, yet under Biden, the MFN rule was rescinded without a whimper. Trump, in contrast, resurrected it and expanded its scope. In so doing, he returned to the populist conservative ethos that put him in the White House: government exists to serve its citizens, not to enrich corporate middlemen or subsidize foreign welfare states.

The critics will continue to cry foul. But as prices fall and access improves, their objections will ring hollow. The moral arc of drug pricing reform is long, but with this Executive Order, it bends toward justice. Americans deserve to pay no more than their peers abroad. At last, there is a president willing to say so, and more importantly, to act on it.

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.

White House Pressuring Top News Execs to Bash Impeachment Inquiry

2
White House Principal Deputy Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre holds a press briefing on Friday, July 30, 2021, in the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room of the White House. (Official White House Photo by Erin Scott)

ANALYSIS – In yet another egregious case of “what if Trump had done this?” and “Biden doesn’t care,” the White House is blatantly pressuring major news media executives to toe the Democrat line on the Biden impeachment process. 

Just as House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) said Tuesday that he’s directing House committees to open an impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden over his family’s shady overseas business dealings, the White House sent a letter to major news outlets telling them how to cover it.

Essentially insisting that they should bash it.

CNN reported that Ian Sams, spokesperson for the ‘impeachment war room’ in the White House Counsel’s Office sent the offending letter to the heads  of news organizations such as The New York Times, Fox News, the Associated Press, CBS News and others.

“It’s time for the media to ramp up its scrutiny of House Republicans for opening an impeachment inquiry based on lies,” Sams wrote.

The letter, which said an impeachment inquiry with no supporting evidence should “set off alarm bells for news organizations,” is only the most recent example of how shameless Democrats are about abusing their power and manipulating the media.

McCarthy on Tuesday said the House Oversight Committee’s investigation found a “culture of corruption” around the Biden family dating back years, especially to Joe Biden’s time as Vice President under Barack Obama.

“These are allegations of abuse of power, obstruction and corruption, and they warrant further investigation by the House of Representatives,” McCarthy said. “That’s why today I am directing our House committee to open a formal impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden.”

CNN, apparently already following the White House lead, ‘reported’ on the outrageous letter:

In its letter Wednesday, the White House asked news organizations to be more clear-eyed in their coverage of the impeachment inquiry, and not to fall prey to the traps of false equivalency in reporting.

“Covering impeachment as a process story – Republicans say X, but the White House says Y – is a disservice to the American public who relies on the independent press to hold those in power accountable,” Sams wrote.

“And in the modern media environment, where every day liars and hucksters peddle disinformation and lies everywhere from Facebook to Fox, process stories that fail to unpack the illegitimacy of the claims on which House Republicans are basing all their actions only serve to generate confusion, put false premises in people’s feeds, and obscure the truth,” Sams added.

McCarthy launched the impeachment inquiry Tuesday without a formal House vote in a bid to appease Republicans on his far-right, including those who have threatened to oust the California Republican from his speakership if he does not move swiftly enough on such an investigation.

The discredited left-leaning cable network then repeated the false, boilerplate talking point that: “The Republican House-led investigations into Biden have yet to provide any direct evidence that the president financially benefited from Hunter Biden’s career overseas.”

In doing so, it ignored the mountain of evidence pointing to the likelihood that Joe Biden did benefit financially, and avoided the fact that this is the reason an inquiry is needed to demand the documents that may prove it.

As Newsmax properly reported:

“This is not OK,” journalist Matthew Keys tweeted. “The White House should not be encouraging, influencing or interfering in the editorial strategies of America’s newsrooms, including CNN and the New York Times.”

“Now, any time the media DOES try to hold Republican lawmakers to account, those lawmakers can simply counter by questioning whether it’s actual journalism or something encouraged by the Biden administration,” Keys wrote.

“All this demonstrates is that the Biden administration has lost confidence in the news media – which I guess mirrors public sentiment over the last few years, too.”

“The problem is they’re trying to influence coverage. The government should never do that. It is inappropriate,” Keys wrote.

Of course it is inappropriate. Highly inappropriate. And if Trump’s team had done this during either of his TWO partisan impeachments, all hell would be breaking loose. But Team Biden just doesn’t care.

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

Amanda Head: Disney Stocks Tank Again!

5

Yikes.

Disney has faced quite a tumultuous year after wading into politics and siding with the woke gender mob.

Watch Amanda break down the latest controversy below: