Opinion

Home Opinion

VP Vance Predicts ‘Dumbest’ Democrat Candidate Will Secure Nomination In 2028

Vice President JD Vance took aim at the Democratic Party’s likely 2028 presidential contenders during a lighthearted but pointed exchange on Fox News, joking that the party’s “dumbest” candidate is most likely to emerge from the primary.

In an exclusive interview released Wednesday on Jesse Watters Primetime, Watters raised speculation about California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s national ambitions, noting the governor’s frequent media appearances and rumored White House aspirations.

“Gavin Newsom, obviously, is running for president. Have you seen this guy cross his legs? Have you ever seen anyone cross their legs like that?” Watters asked jokingly.

“My legs don’t cross like that, Jesse,” Vance replied with a laugh. “You can interpret that however you want to.”

Watters went on to frame the looming Democratic contest as a showdown between Newsom and Vice President Kamala Harris.

“Gavin and Kamala are on a collision course,” Watters said. “Who’s gonna win?”

“The dumbest candidate will probably win,” Vance quipped. “That’s my guess with the Democratic Party.”

Vance argued that the current Democratic bench reflects deeper structural problems within the party, particularly its fixation on identity politics over competence.

“I mean, look, the Democrats have a couple of big issues, and one is that they lean so far into wokeism that they can’t see the obviousness of the fact, which is that Kamala Harris is not qualified to be president of the United States,” Vance said.

“That’s why she got the vice presidential nomination. That’s why she got the presidential nomination. This is who Kamala Harris is.”

Vance contrasted Harris with Newsom, describing the California governor as emblematic of failed progressive governance.

“Now, the flip side is, I think you have an unbelievably corrupt and incompetent governor in Gavin Newsom,” he said. “The fact that those are the two frontrunners just suggests how deeply deranged the Democrat Party is. Let them fight it out. We’ll figure it out.”

A Weak Democratic Bench for 2028

While Newsom and Harris dominate early speculation, Democrats face a thin and fractured 2028 field. Other frequently mentioned names include Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker, and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez—each of whom carries significant liabilities with general-election voters. Many Democrats privately acknowledge that the party lacks a unifying figure with broad national appeal, particularly as voters continue to recoil from progressive economic and cultural policies.

Republicans, by contrast, are positioning themselves as the party of stability, affordability, and public safety heading into the next election cycle.

Cost of Living and Accountability

Watters noted that Democrats are expected to campaign heavily on cost-of-living issues in upcoming elections, a strategy Vance dismissed as deeply hypocritical.

“That’s a pot-meet-kettle situation,” Vance argued, pointing to Democratic-led policies that fueled inflation, higher energy costs, and housing shortages.

He credited the Trump administration with reversing those trends.

“We haven’t even been in office for a year, and you’ve already seen prices start to come down. You’ve seen rents start to come down. You’ve seen groceries leveling off,” Vance said.

“Is there more work to do? Absolutely. But the people who are going to do that work is the Trump administration, is the president of the United States, who is solving the Democrats’ affordability crisis.”

“You don’t give power back to the very people who set the house on fire,” he added. “You give more power to the person who put the fire out.”

Impeachment Politics

When asked whether Democrats would attempt to impeach President Trump again if they regain control of Congress, Vance said such a move would be predictable—and revealing.

“I’m sure he’ll get impeached,” Vance said. “Look, they have nothing to actually run on or govern on.”

“Their entire obsessive focus of that party is they hate Donald Trump,” he continued. “So, if they ever get power, are they going to lower Americans’ taxes? No. Are they going to make your life more affordable? No. Are they going to solve the crime crisis? No.”

“What they’re going to do is they’re going to spend all their time and all of your money trying to get Donald Trump.”

Vance urged voters to focus on results rather than partisan theatrics.

“I think the American people should vote for the people who want to make their life more affordable, who want to make their neighborhoods safer,” he said. “That’s what we’re trying to deliver every single day.”

Newsom Responds With a Meme

Newsom’s office responded to the interview with a digitally altered image of Vance crossing his legs in an exaggerated pose, captioned: “We all know JD copies Daddy.”

Tucker Carlson Minimizes Israeli Tragedy – Guilty of ‘Moral Stupidity’?

3
Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America,

ANALYSIS – Tucker Carlson strikes again. As a lifelong conservative, I often approved of Carlson’s message. He often took on the liberal media and skewered those on the Left. 

But increasingly, his ‘populist’ stick is wearing thin.

Some of his conspiracy theories have proven to be farfetched, if not nutty. And his pro-Russia line has become predictable, even to the Kremlin.

But now he is showing some additional worrisome traits – isolationism to the point of pacifism and surrender, under the guise of ‘realism.’ 

Is he guilty of “moral stupidity”?

I know he likes his clicks and views and wants more attention since being dropped from Fox, but come on, Tucker – WTH?

On Monday, just two days after Hamas terrorists raped, slaughtered and pillaged their way across southern Israel, Carlson posted a video on X.

In it, he perfunctorily acknowledged that the murderous Hamas rampage was a “crime,” and Israel had a right to defend itself, before quickly moving on to his now preferred line of: ‘everything we, or our allies, may do to defend against aggression may lead to nuclear war.’

“The question for American policymakers, however, is what do we do next?” asked Carlson before suggesting that the events of last weekend could easily lead to war with Iran and even the use of nuclear weapons.

My questions for Tucker: Can you spend just a little longer showing sincere outrage at what happened in Israel?

And can you spend a little longer understanding the bigger threat posed to the U.S. by Iran?

Yes, a lot of things happening in the world today could lead to nuclear war: Russia invading Ukraine; Iran directing Hamas to slaughter Israelis; China invading Taiwan. All could lead to a potential nuclear conflict. Potentially.

And that fear is what our mortal enemies want to paralyze us with. In this way, Carlson is now the poster child for enemy propaganda. He could have been part of the leftist, Moscow-directed, ‘Nuclear Freeze’ movement during the Cold War.

Don’t do anything outside the United States or you might start WWIII. That’s not a sound policy.

Carlson is also getting increasingly vicious and petty in his attacks against anyone he disagrees with, now usually fellow conservatives. Even when he is totally wrong.

He savaged Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley for suggesting that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin ‘Bibi’ Netanyahu“finish” Hamas once and for all. Something Bibi should do.

“She’s a child and this is the tantrum of a child,” ranted Carlson, calling her comments “ignorant, cocksure,” and “bloodthirsty.”

Sadly, Carlson mistook Haley’s remarks for talking about Iran rather than Hamas, so he was totally off, and it wasn’t even relevant. Ooops.

Which is another thing I’ve been noticing about him. He is increasingly just plain sloppy. And at least two of these harsh names also apply more to his guest, Vivek Ramaswamy, and himself, than to Haley.

I also wish Carlson would have used the third term – ‘bloodthirsty’ – to refer to Hamas, rather than fellow conservative, Haley.

But to Carlson, his fellow Americans deserve more insults than our enemies. That is concerning.

Carlson simply fails to understand that Iran is behind the attack on Israel, and that this attack is part of a much bigger campaign by Iran against the West and the United States.

But Carlson’s attempt to equate fentanyl overdoses in the United States, which is a tragedy (that Joe Biden has abetted through his open border policy), and the deliberate massacres in Israel, was just obscene.

And that part of Carlson’s tirade provoked conservative commentator Ben Shapiro to launch into a blistering criticism of him.

It is a moral atrocity and a moral evil for people to kidnap women, rape them and drag them back to the Gaza border. Those are not the same thing and Tucker knows that. But this is a cheap way of telling you not to look. Don’t look. Stop caring. Because after all, what does it matter? What does it matter? Now again, I don’t know who thinks that that’s a sophisticated point of view, especially when nobody is calling for America to go to war with Iran [to be fair, Lindsey Graham IS calling for an attack against Iran, but ONLY IF it directly attacks Israel]. The entire purpose of having an aircraft carrier in the Mediterranean is to avoid that. But here is Tucker playing — I don’t even know the game he’s playing. It’s just a dumb, it’s a dumb game.

Shapiro added:

That is not the same thing. I promise you, it is not the same thing as a terrorist breaking into your home and murdering your children in their beds in front of you and dragging your wife off to be raped in Gaza. That is not the same thing. Pretending that is a moral, it’s a moral blight. It’s idiocy. It’s just moral stupidity at the highest level. 

Of course, we should care about what happens with fentanyl. Of course, we should care about — we should close our border. Have I been unclear about this? Of course, America should have closed borders when it comes to this sort of stuff. I’m on the same side as Tucker on that. I just don’t understand why he’s not on my side when it comes to ‘Hamas has to be wiped off the face of the earth.’ 

And to be clear myself — while I agree that we need to weigh the risks in any U.S. involvement in this escalating Mideast conflict, it’s not just Israel’s fight. Iran is gunning for us, and Israel is just in its way.

Carlson needs to get a reality check on his foreign policy ‘realism.’

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

Alec Baldwin Charged with Involuntary Manslaughter over ‘Rust’ Movie Set Shooting

2

ANALYSIS – From the day cinematographer Halyna Hutchins was shot and killed on the set of the movie Rust, on Oct. 21, 2021, there has been a flurry of speculation over whether anyone would be criminally charged.

Hutchins was killed when a live round was fired from a real ‘prop’ gun being held by liberal actor Alec Baldwin.

Well, now the speculation is over, and Baldwin will be charged.

He has always denied responsibility, saying the replica old west revolver should have had dummy bullets and that he never pulled the trigger.

On the first point, Baldwin is correct; on the second, he is less convincing.

The set armorer is responsible for ensuring gun safety. And there was no reason for live rounds to be on a movie set. Period.

Much less mixed in with dummy rounds.

The armorer certainly is responsible if not culpable. And a big question is why live rounds were on the set and mixed in with dummy rounds and who put them there.

But experts have shown that Baldwin’s claim of not firing the gun doesn’t wash.

It is physically impossible for this type of gun to fire without the trigger being pulled and/or the hammer dropped.

Beyond his immediate possible culpability as the man who ‘fired’ the gun, Baldwin was also a producer of the low-budget Western film.

After the shooting numerous current and former crew members from the film publicly claimed that safety was extremely lax, and formal complaints had been made and ignored about those safety concerns.

The shooting occurred while rehearsing a scene inside a wooden chapel on Bonanza Creek Ranch in New Mexico.

This is a popular western location seen in the likes of Jimmy Stewart’s 1955 “The Man from Laramie” and Paul Newman and Robert Redford’s 1969 “Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid.”

As the crew worked out positions for the scene, Baldwin, playing a grizzled 1880s Kansas outlaw, fired a live round from an Italian-made Pietta Long Colt revolver replica – the bullet passed through Hutchins’ chest and lodged in director Joel Souza’s shoulder.

Hutchins died in a flight to the hospital in Albuquerque, while Souza was later discharged from the hospital.

In April 2022, the producers, including Baldwin, were fined $136,793 by the New Mexico Occupational Health and Safety Bureau, which said: “management knew that firearm safety procedures were not being followed on set and demonstrated plain indifference to employee safety.”

A wrongful death lawsuit was then filed against Alec Baldwin and other key members of the production in Feb. 2022.

The lawsuit named Baldwin and others who “are responsible for the safety on the set” and called out “reckless behavior and cost-cutting” that led to the death of Hutchins, according to the family’s lawyer.

The lawsuit also claimed that Baldwin and other “Rust” crew and cast committed “major breaches” of safety on the set.

That lawsuit was later settled.

But Baldwin’s legal woes continue as he is now being hit with two counts of involuntary manslaughter over the shooting.

Hannah Gutierrez Reed, the film’s young and inexperienced armorer, will also be charged with two counts of involuntary manslaughter.

Meanwhile, assistant director Dave Halls who handed the gun to Baldwin prior to the shooting signed a plea agreement for a charge of the negligent use of a deadly weapon.

In return, he received a suspended sentence and six months of probation, according to the district attorney.

If Baldwin is convicted, he could be facing up to 18 months in prison.

“Involuntary manslaughter in New Mexico is a Class D felony punishable by up to 18 months in prison,” former Assistant U.S. Attorney Neama Rahmani explained to Fox News Digital. “If Baldwin is convicted, I can see him being sentenced at or near the max.”

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

Democrats Want To Legally Protect Pedophiles In Minnesota

5
Arrest image via Pixabay

ALERT – Could your state be next? In yet another insane proposal in the left’s radical ‘gender bending’ agenda, a bill in the Minnesota Legislature is changing the definition of “sexual orientation” to include pedophilia.

This is an extreme and radical move that would make pedophiles a legally protected class of people in the state. And it isn’t getting the attention it deserves.

This sickening bill, promoted by 17 of the state’s Democrats, is working its way through the legislature.

It has a growing list of sponsors and has already had its “second reading,” which means it can appear on the floor for a vote at any time.

Does this make the state’s Democrats “sexual groomers” of children?

It seems so.

It’s also a natural, if perverse, continuation of the extreme ideology which makes gender identity and transgenderism a priority for the left.

The bill shows how their slippery slope works at the state level, which eventually moves to other states, and then to the federal government.

First, you create a law that makes sexual orientation a protected class by prohibiting discrimination of any kind based on sexual orientation. In Minnesota, as in many other places, that law has been around for a while.

Laws like that are used to support countless far-left lawsuits, discriminatory quotas and all the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives that are wreaking havoc across America.

Then you quietly amend that law to remove a provision that excludes pedophilia as a legitimate sexual orientation.

In this case, they have deliberately stricken the provisions of the current law that specifically carved out pedophilia from the definition of sexual orientation.

The current law says: “Sexual orientation does not include a physical or sexual attachment to children.” [emphasis added]

But in the new Democrat proposal, that line will be removed, essentially making pedophiles a protected class along with transgender people and every other sexual orientation the left can invent.

Pedophiles will also get the same legal protections against discrimination as gays and lesbians, who legitimately deserve it, and be lumped together with them in the same legal category.

While this amendment to current law won’t make pedophilia “legal” (yet) in Minnesota, discrimination against pedophiles will be prohibited if this bill becomes law.

What does this actually mean?

David Strom explains in Hot Air that:

You will be subject to lawsuits if you discriminate against pedophiles. You have to hire them, house them, and serve them in your restaurant regardless of your objection to their evil desires. They will have more rights than you. Because they are pedophiles.

Strom adds: “anybody who wants to opt out of affirming crazy people will be turned into targets of lawsuits and harassment.”

And legalization will come soon after. He continues: “…the next stop is going to be explicitly legalizing pedophilia.”

Strom notes how this part of the left’s slippery slope works, too:

Once the Rubicon of declaring children mature enough to make lifetime medical decisions at ages as young as 8 it makes no sense to assert that they aren’t mature enough to engage in “consensual” relationships. If you can get permission from a child to sterilize and mutilate them, why stop there? They have been essentially declared adults in sexual matters.

He concludes, not wrongly: “The Democrat Party is becoming the party of sexual groomers. It really is that simple.”

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

Amanda Head: New WOKE Disney Movie Utterly BOMBS!

1

Disney is committed to learning this lesson the hard way: Go woke, Go broke.

Disney’s latest woke venture “Strange World” is on track to cost the company more than $100 million.

Watch Amanda break down the spectacular flop below:

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

Senate Flies US Flag Upside Down Indicating ‘Emergency Distress’

0

ANALYSIS – We still don’t know if it was an intentional call for help, a prank, or a broken clip as Senate officials claim, but the American flag did spend some time flying upside down over the U.S. Capitol. 

And considering it flew over the Democrat-led Senate building, the meaning and symbolism weren’t lost on many Americans.

A tweet by Rogan O’Handley, a political activist whose Twitter handle is DC_Draino, posted on May 16, 2023, showed a photo of the U.S. flag outside the Capitol flying upside down.

He tweeted: “NEW: US flag currently flying upside down over Senate building signaling distress and needing rescue.”

DC_Draino added: “Some believe it was flipped after Sen. Fetterman spoke with the sophistication of a drunk toddler in a hearing today.”

The tweet was viewed 4.3 million times by Thursday.

Under the U.S. Flag Code, turning the flag upside down should never be done “except as a signal of dire distress in instances of extreme danger to life or property.”

Others noted that Congress, and indeed the entire country, is in distress and needs emergency assistance.

The upside-down flag display has also been used as a means of protest, mostly by conservatives.

Newsweek confirmed that the photo is real and the flag was at one point upside down, but reported that an official at the Capitol blamed the upside down flag on a broken clip, adding that the problem was later corrected.

However, many on Twitter questioned the explanation. One asked: “If it was a broken clip and the wind was blowing as it clearly is in the photo, why would it not appear to be attached by only one clip?”

“Science/physics, right?”

“If it was caused because a ‘clip broke’ wouldn’t the flag just streamer in the wind instead of still fluttering like a flag?” another user suggested.

DC_Draino also responded to the official explanation reported by Newsweek, and mocked those who bought it at face value:

Yes I know the article says a “clip broke” but the flag wouldn’t fly like that if it was hanging by 1 clip

Guarantee the reply guys in my comments taking the government’s PR answer at face value are vaccinated & boosted

The picture is clearly showing something different.


However, as symbolic and justified it may be to fly the American flag upside down over the Democrat-controlled Senate, this was still likely a case of human error and broken clip. 

Still, maybe it should become a regular thing until the Republicans retake the Senate.

America is definitely in emergency distress.

Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views 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.

Amanda Head: Joe Biden’s Age Problem

0

President Joe Biden is 80 years old yet Democrats rush to defend him from any critics…

Let Amanda explain the latest controversy below:

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

Amanda Head: Lesson NOT Learned – RNC Still Blowing Your Money On Flowers!

11

Will they ever listen? The Republican National Committee (RNC) has been caught red-handed yet again…

Watch Amanda explain the controversy below:

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

Credible US Officials Testify to Congress About Real UFO Threat

1

ANALYSIS – Decades after the infamous Roswell incident captivated Americans, the House of Representatives has convened a landmark panel on Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAPs), also known as Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs).

In what would have been unimaginable just a few years ago, the hearing is the most serious acknowledgment yet that the mysterious sightings require scrutiny at the highest levels of government.

The debate about UAP has become a hot topic in recent years following multiple leaked photographs and video recordings from the U.S. Navy showing UAP craft operating at high speed over American airspace, often with no visible propulsion and maneuvering in ways that baffle aeronautics experts.

A leaked navy video, captured in July 2019, for example, shows a sphere-shaped unidentified object flying over water near San Diego before apparently disappearing into the ocean.

At the hearing, three witnesses testified under oath about their experiences with UFOs. Significantly, former military and intelligence officials testified to the panel Wednesday that they have seen UFOs and said they could pose risks to national security. 

All three witnesses said the UAP may be probing for weakness in the U.S. military system.

The highly credible former officials called for the U.S. government to share what it knows about the phenomena.

But the Pentagon’s UAP task force, the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office, says it hasn’t been able to substantiate claims that any federal programs have possessed or reverse-engineered extraterrestrial materials.

Still, during two hours of testimony on July 26, three witnesses shared their encounters with flying objects that they say defy explanation:

1) David Grusch, an ex-Air Force intelligence officer, claims the U.S. has been running a secret program to retrieve and reverse engineer UAPs for decades, and has been aware of “non-human” activity since the 1930s.

Grusch said he believes the U.S. government is in possession of UAP based on interviewing 40 witnesses over four years with direct knowledge of the program. 

Perhaps more sensationally, in response to a question regarding aliens, he replied “biologics [life forms] came with some of these [UAP] recoveries.”

2) Ryan Graves, a former navy fighter pilot, testified his squadron repeatedly encountered mysterious flying objects which could remain stationary despite hurricane-level winds – claiming he saw them off the Atlantic coast “every day for at least a couple years.”

The Wall Street Journal reported on one sighting:

Graves said his aircrew saw UAP during a training exercise off the coast of Virginia Beach, Va. Two jets encountered “a dark gray or black cube inside of a clear sphere” and the object came within 50 feet of the lead aircraft, he said. It was estimated to be 5 to 15 feet in diameter, he said.

3) Retired U.S. Navy commander David Fravor recounted a 2004 encounter with a “Tic Tac” shaped UAP that moved in a way that baffled aviators. Fravor said it had no visible rotors or wings. 

It was “moving very abruptly over the white water, like a ping-pong ball,” he added, noting that he flew his aircraft closer to get a better view of the UAP, but “it rapidly accelerated and disappeared.”

But this is only the latest and most significant public inquiry into the UFO threat.

In 2021 the U.S. intelligence agencies were called to deliver a report on Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP) to Congress.

The first unclassified report from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) made public what the Pentagon reportedly knows about UAP, renewing interest in the mysterious objects which have grown into a modern myth in American society.

ODNI produced a second UAP report in 2022.

Whether UAP is the result of advanced foreign technology or from a more otherworldly source, government officials are now demanding to know more about them. And so is the public.

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