Opinion

Home Opinion

China’s Spy Balloon Was a Big Deal, Likely Gained Valuable SIGINT for Beijing

11
Joe Biden via Gage Skidmore Flickr

ANALYSIS – Joe Biden’s Chinese spy balloon fiasco keeps getting worse. As I noted earlier, almost all of the Biden spin about the Chinese balloon that spent eight long days surveilling military and strategic sites across the United States, was misleading or outright false. 

Contrary to the furious pro-Biden spin, the 200ft tall balloon with a jetliner-sized surveillance package strapped to it, did pose an intelligence and military threat.

It could also have been shot down much earlier without undue risk to those on the ground – especially since it first cruised over the Aleutian Islands and parts of Alaska.

And no, President Trump did not know or ignore prior Chinese balloon incursions when he was in office. 

Reports of brief crossings of Chinese balloons over peripheral parts of the U.S., like Florida, or U.S. territories far from the continental U.S. like Guam, did not surface until well after Trump left office.

Apparently, the Pentagon didn’t detect those extremely brief forays at the time, displaying a major gap in our surveillance capabilities.

But this incursion was of a whole different scope and scale.

I earlier argued that the primary goal of this latest extended cross-country balloon incursion for China was political.

It was a clear test. What would Biden and the U.S. military do? And their answer was, basically nothing until after the airship completed its 8-day surveillance mission.

However, an added, and more dangerous goal was potentially to test how to use a stratospheric balloon to employ a small nuclear device at an extremely high altitude to produce a massive electromagnetic pulse (EMP) that would fry communications, power networks and almost all electronics across much of the United States.   

For more on that see my previous piece.

But let’s return to the more mundane intelligence-gathering functions of this airship. 

While the Biden spinners rushed to say that the balloon could not gather intel not already gained by Chinese satellites in low earth orbit, this simply ignorant, and untrue.

One left-leaning intelligence news site, SpyTalk, edited by the elderly Jeff Stein, wrote in an almost knee-jerk fashion without waiting for more facts: “Pssst: Chinese Satellite Not a Threat. Experts say news media hysteria over the floating orb not at all warranted.”

Stein then brought in his usual suspects to buttress his pro-Biden spin.

The liberal Stein quoted one of his regular minions, Paul Cobaugh, a left-leaning retired Army information operations specialist with no intelligence or technology background, as saying we have a “variety of capabilities to render it unusable or mitigate the threat.” 

This is partly true. We do have means to mitigate the threat. 

A senior U.S. defense official said on Feb. 2 that when the Chinese balloon was detected near Malmstrom Air Force Base in Montana, home of the 341st strategic intercontinental ballistic missile wing, the Pentagon “acted immediately to protect against the collection of secretive information.” 

That likely meant shutting off signals-emitting systems and moving secretive aircraft and sensitive equipment under cover or into a hangar.

The Pentagon can take similar steps to stop satellites from gathering intelligence, but it is far more disruptive to have a giant airship looming overhead for long periods of time, as it was in this case.

But SpyTalk’s Cobaugh takes his uninformed argument about the balloon to an extreme, adding with no nuance or uncertainty:

“It’s not a threat.”

SpyTalk didn’t stop there though and added the always predictable, hyper-partisan, Trump-hating former Air Force general and CIA director Michael Hayden to the mix, who totally dismissed the Chinese balloon, and Biden’s inaction, by saying:

“Really, it’s not a big deal.” 

Well, this is all just nonsense. It was a very big deal.

Beyond the various risks noted above and in my earlier piece, the ability to vacuum up valuable Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) unavailable to satellites, makes the balloon threat unique. 

As Defense News reports:

Experts say balloons loitering at high altitudes can offer some advantages over satellites and drones — or could at least augment their intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities.

Tom Karako, director of the Missile Defense Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies think tank, said one benefit of these balloons is their ability to hover closer to the ground than satellites, and they may be able to intercept communication or electronic signals that orbiting systems can’t.

“It could be thermal infrared, it could be signals intelligence. One of the reasons there are advantages to the suborbital position is you might not be able to do all of that from space,” he told C4ISRNET in a Feb. 3 interview. “There’s a whole lot of value to something other than space.”

Bryan Clark, director of the Hudson Institute’s Center for Defense Concepts and Technology, said balloons also offer more persistent, less predictable coverage over an area of interest. While satellites follow a known orbit, airships use wind currents and automated controls to maneuver in different directions. They can also hover in one place for a long period of time.

Clark told C4ISRNET: “With a satellite, you know when they’re going to go overhead, so you stop doing whatever you’re doing for the time it’s overhead. If you have a balloon, it could be out there for days or months, and you’re sort of left either having to stop whatever you’re doing that’s generating intel — or you live with it.”

And there is much more our intelligence experts and agencies can’t yet divulge about this balloon.

Hopefully, once it is fully recovered we can expect a full damage assessment.

So, yes, the high-tech, high-altitude, Chinese surveillance airship that spent 8 days traversing the U.S. was a threat, and the leftist partisan spin machine continues to churn out uninformed nonsense.

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

Amanda Head: Hollywood Star Defends Common Sense!

0

“Harry Potter” actress Helena Bonham Carter has landed herself in hot water after speaking out against liberals’ favorite weapon of choice: cancel culture.

Watch Amanda explain the controversy below:

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

Justice Department Sued For Hidden Documents On Pennsylvania Trump Shooter

1

Americans may know more about the man who attempted to assassinate President Donald Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania, after a legal watchdog filed a federal lawsuit for documents being concealed by the Justice Department.

The non-profit public interest law firm Judicial Watch announced in a statement it “filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice for all records regarding Thomas Matthew Crooks, who attempted to assassinate President Trump on July 13, 2024.”

“No more delays and excuses, the FBI should release what it has on the man who tried to kill President Trump a full year ago in Butler. Attorney General Pam Bondi should direct a full and immediate records response to this Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

Judicial Watch notes it sued after the FBI “failed to respond to a July 24, 2024, FOIA request 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.

“On July 13, 2024, then-Republican presidential candidate Trump survived an assassination attempt while speaking at an open-air campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania. Trump was shot and wounded in his upper right ear by 20-year-old Crooks, who fired eight rounds from his perch on top of a nearby building,” Judicial Watch explained, adding, “Crooks also killed one audience member, firefighter Corey Comperatore, and critically injured two others. Crooks was shot and killed by the counter sniper team of the United States Secret Service.”

Judicial Watch has been pursuing the information for nearly a year, noting:

In March 2025, Judicial Watch sued the U.S. Department of Homeland Security for records related to security provided for the July 13, 2024, rally in Butler, PA, during which there was an assassination attempt on President Trump (Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:25-cv-00704)).

In September 2004, Judicial Watch sued the Department of Homeland Security for Secret Service and other records regarding potential increased protective services to former President Trump’s security detail prior to the attempt on his life at his July 13 campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:24-cv-02495)).

 In August 2024, Judicial Watch obtained records from the district attorney’s office in Butler County, PA, detailing the extensive preparation of local police for the rally at which former President Trump was shot. The preparation included sniper teams, counter assault teams and a quick response force. On August 9, in response to a separate open records request, Judicial Watch obtained bodycam footage of the July 13 assassination events from the Butler Township Police Department.

Biden Buddies at DOJ Refused to Help Fellow US Attorney on Hunter Case

2
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 – FBI agent bombshell – Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss, now a Special Counsel, was the lead prosecutor investigating Hunter Biden for alleged tax offenses. 

He is accused of slow-rolling the investigation, and he contrived a sweetheart plea deal that would have essentially given Hunter nothing more than a slap on the wrist.

That deal blew up in June, as I have written previously, TWICE, thanks to both GOP pressure and an astute judge who questioned the shady deal.

Now it turns out, his fellow U.S. Attorneys for D.C. and the Central District of California at the Department of Justice (DoJ), also refused to work with Weiss in his investigation of the First Son. 

This, according to an FBI agent who recently testified before the House Judiciary Committee.

It is bad timing for Hunter, coming as a Delaware grand jury has finally indicted Biden Jr. on felony gun charges, right before the statute of limitations, like those on two years of tax evasion, ran out (as was previously intended?).

It also shows that the Hunter buck stopped with Merrick Garland, the Biden Attorney General, not Weiss.

The FBI agent corroborated IRS whistleblower Gary Shapley’s earlier testimony about how the Hunter investigation was mishandled at DoJ.

Based on transcripts of his testimony, the agent reportedly stated that Matthew Graves, U.S. Attorney for D.C., and E. Martin Estrada, U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California, “refused to work” with Weiss on charges against Hunter Biden in their jurisdictions.

When asked specifically about Graves, the agent said: “I remember learning at some point in the investigation that Mr. Weiss would have to go through his other processes because the U.S. Attorney’s Offices had, I guess, in that sense, using that terminology, wasn’t going to partner.”

Both these federal prosecutors were proven partisan Democrats. One was a Biden loyalist.

Graves was appointed D.C. U.S. Attorney by Joe Biden in November 2021. Previously he worked for Biden’s presidential campaign and donated to it repeatedly as well.

Estrada was appointed U.S. Attorney for California’s Central District in September 2022. Previously he had made donations to Vice President Kamala Harris’ Democratic Senate campaign.

This is serious stuff.

It could also show that Weiss lied to, or at least misled, Congress when he said in written testimony to Senator Lindsey Graham July 10 that “I’ve never been denied the authority to bring charges in any jurisdiction.”

The blatant ‘obstruction’ by these partisan Democrat hack prosecutors should cause concern and raise questions about the integrity of the Justice Department under Biden.

It is also adding more damaging evidence of Biden’s corruption as the Hunter prosecution continues, and the House launches its impeachment inquiry of Joe Biden.

But it says a lot more. By refusing to press charges in their respective jurisdictions, these Biden buddies passed the buck to their boss, not Weiss.

And who is their boss – Merrick Garland, Biden’s Attorney General.

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

Did Fauci Lie To Congress? New Investigation May Reveal The Truth.

1
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Dr. Anthony S. Fauci. Photo Credit: Fogarty International Center from Bethesda, MD, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.

In the wake of revelations that the former Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Dr. Anthony Fauci may have knowingly lied to Congress in sworn testimony, U.S. Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) is asking the Justice Department to open a criminal investigation.

Paul has asked U.S. Attorney for Washington, D.C., Matthew Graves to open an investigation into testimony Fauci made to the United States Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) on May 11, 2021, in which Fauci denied funding research at viral laboratory in China where the COVID-19 virus reportedly originated.

“The NIH has not ever and does not now fund gain-of-function research in the Wuhan Institute of Virology,” Fauci said under oath in May.

But a month later a June 14, 2023,  Government Accountability Office report concluded the Wuhan Institute of Virology did receieve NIH funding.

There are concerns the COVID-19 virus “may have been genetically engineered because gain-of-function research was taking place in Wuhan before the pandemic,” Paul reports.

Now Paul wants to determine if Fauci’s statements were illegal.

“I warned Dr. Fauci of the criminal implications of lying to Congress and offered him an opportunity to recant his previous statement,” Paul wrote in a letter to Graves. “Dr. Fauci’s testimony is inconsistent with facts that have since come to light.”

“Before Congress, Dr. Fauci denied funding gain-of-function research, to the press he claims to have a dispassionate view on the lab leak hypothesis, and in private he acknowledges gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology to his colleagues. His own colleagues have acknowledged Dr. Fauci’s inconsistency. A congressional hearing, however, is not the place for a public servant to play political games – especially when the health and well-being of American citizens is on the line,” Paul writes.

Under 18 U.S.C. § 1001 it is a federal crime to make “any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation” as part of “any investigation or review, conducted pursuant to the authority of any committee, subcommittee, commission or office of the Congress, consistent with applicable rules of the House or Senate.”

The penalty for an offense includes criminal fines and imprisonment of up to five years.

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk. It was first published in American Liberty News.

READ NEXT: Ukrainian Special Forces Reportedly ‘Pinned Down’ During Night Raid In Crimea By Security Guard In Underwear

Amanda Head: DeSantis Is In! Tell Us Your Thoughts!

28

The showdown between former President Donald Trump and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has America hooked.

Have you already made up your mind or are you waiting for a fight?

Watch Amanda below:

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

Pentagon Warns Biden’s Offshore Wind Farms Are National Security Risk

4
Joe Biden via Gage Skidmore Flickr

ANALYSIS – Joe Biden has made his radical ‘green’ climate agenda a centerpiece of his administration. He even had his Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and the rest of his security team make it a national defense priority, superseding in some ways, China, Russia, and terrorism.  

A lot of Biden’s agenda is pushed by radical leftist activists, but the green energy industry is an increasingly wealthy and powerful lobby.

And they operate hand in hand.

And Biden’s ‘climate czar,’ John Kerry, is one of its biggest cheerleaders inside the administration.

Still, it seems reality is now seeping in at the Pentagon as the stuff is hitting the fan. 

The fan, in this case, is the wind turbine used in vast wind farms throughout the northeast coastal regions of the United States.

Coincidentally, this is also where a lot of military bases are located, and our air and naval forces operate. 

And the Department of Defense (DOD) is quietly expressing its frustration and concern with Biden’s expansive climate agenda’s impact on our military operations and American national security.

Especially the creation of massive wind farms on federally leased waters off the mid-Atlantic coast.

Some at the Pentagon are even referring to it as a national security risk.

And Congress must take note and take action.

Bloomberg reported on Monday that an Oct. 6, 2022 report produced by the U.S. Navy and Air Force, which includes maps highlighting sensitive military zones off the mid-Atlantic coast, was circulated with the energy industry and state officials earlier this month.

Non-political DOD officials are trying to raise the alarm even as their politicized leadership tows the Team Biden ‘green’ line.

Of course, political appointees at DOD will downplay any conflict between the Pentagon and Biden’s extreme climate agenda.

Pentagon spokesperson Kelly Flynn only told Fox News Digital that: “The initial assessment performed by DoD found complicated compatibility challenges with wind turbines near Navy and Air Force training.” 

“Compatibility challenges” is doublespeak for we can’t put wind farms offshore without damaging our military training and readiness across the entire eastern seaboard.

While this has been an issue since before Biden, the danger has just been supercharged by the current administration, which refuses to listen or doesn’t care.

Fox News Digital reminds us of the prior warnings: “The Pentagon’s warning late last year… came years after it similarly warned in 2019 that much of the North Atlantic wind lease planning area was an ‘exclusion zone.’ And a DoD map obtained by that was published in 2018 identified nearly the entire East Coast as “highly problematic” for leasing.”

Still, Biden and his radical climate cronies in the wind farm industry, such as the American Clean Power Association, a leading industry group representing wind developers, are plowing ahead.

Bloomberg explained that the new DOD maps show massive acreage cordoned off in federal waters near North Carolina, Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware. 

At least four offshore wind lease areas proposed by the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) are described as “highly problematic” by DOD, while another two are identified as “requiring further study.”  

Fox News Digital continued:

“The Navy has said there is not an area in that whole east block that does not interfere with DoD missions. But BOEM is continuing ahead,” said Meghan Lapp, the fisheries liaison for Rhode Island-based fishing company Seafreeze. “And when I’ve asked them on webinars, ‘The Navy said that this is a problem. How can you still be leasing it?’ They’re like, ‘Oh, well, we’re just going to continue the discussions.'” 

Well, this is serious stuff, and if the administration won’t listen to its own Defense Department, Congress must get involved.

Gabriella Hoffman, a senior fellow at the Independent Women’s Forum’s Center for Energy and Conservation, told Fox News Digital: “The Pentagon’s warning about national security implications stemming from offshore wind development on the Atlantic Coast, including proximity to critical Virginia military installations, shouldn’t be dismissed.” 

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

Pro-Lifers Bash Trump ‘Terrible’ Abortion Comments – But Was He Wrong?

1
Washington D.C., USA - January 22, 2015; A Pro-Life woman clashes with a group of Pro-Choice demonstrators at the U.S. Supreme Court.

ANALYSIS – During his recent NBC interview, former president Donald Trump called Florida’s recently passed six-week abortion ban “terrible.” The ban was signed into law by his 2024 Republican campaign rival Florida governor Ron DeSantis.

Trump believes that picking six weeks as the line to draw for abortion banning is not politically viable nationally. He argued that both liberals and conservatives should agree on a compromise solution — a compromise number of weeks.

And to clarify, Trump said the six-week ban was: “terrible. A terrible mistake.”

He was saying that, politically, passing a six-week ban was a mistake, because it charges up the pro-abortion activists, and alienates moderate women needed to win nationally.

Like it or not, exit polls in 2022 showed that the rush to ban abortions outright by some states just after Roe vs Wade was reversed, scared away a lot of independents and moderate suburban women, contributing to the extremely weak results for Republicans in the last midterm elections.

Trump, the ever-ready wheeler dealer, also predicted that: “both sides are going to like me,” adding, “What’s going to happen is you’re going to come up with a number of weeks or months, you’re going to come up with a number that’s going to make people happy.”

Here I think Trump made a terrible choice of words. You don’t want the left to like you, even if you are trying to disarm them. But that’s the way he thinks and speaks.

The former president also said that he would be “a mediator” between both sides to come up with a policy that is “good for everybody.”

I take that to mean a compromise timeline on the number of weeks for banning abortion nationwide, and what exceptions to make.

Some pro-lifers immediately bashed Trump for his comments. The Christian Post reported on the backlash:

Trump’s criticism of Florida’s law that bans abortion once a heartbeat can be detected, usually around six weeks of gestation, did not sit well with pro-life activists

Lila Rose, the founder and president of the pro-life group Live Action, took to X to describe the former president’s remarks as “pathetic and unacceptable.”

“Trump is actively attacking the very pro-life laws made possible by Roe’s overturning,” Rose wrote. “Heartbeat Laws have saved thousands of babies. But Trump wants to compromise on babies’ lives so pro-abort Dems ‘like him.'” 

And then there was conservative culture warrior Matthew Walsh, with whom I usually agree, who called Trump’s remarks as “an awful answer from a moral perspective” and “also stupid politically.” 

In his post on X (formerly Twitter) Walsh said that “there is no compromise on abortion that everyone will like.”

“It’s delusional to think otherwise. And contrary to Trump’s claims, almost all Democrats are indeed extreme on this issue,” he added. “You will be hard pressed to find more than maybe two or three on the national stage who don’t want abortion until birth or beyond. You can’t win over Democrats by going squishy on this issue. Republicans have tried that brilliant strategy for decades and accomplished exactly nothing by it.” 

But is Trump wrong? 

A six-week ban based on a fetal heartbeat sounds very reasonable to me. And is fine for Florida.

But I know that won’t wash with many other folks across the country who aren’t extreme but prefer another timeline for banning abortion. GOP presidential candidate Nikki Haley, who is staunchly pro-life, doesn’t believe a 15-week national ban is realistic either.

As governor of South Carolina, Haley signed a 20-week ban, joining 12 other states back then with bans.

Polls have shown that many, if not most, Democrats believe in some restrictions on abortion. Most, if not all Republicans will make exceptions for rape, incest, and health of the mother. Many would be happy with any reasonable ban, whether six, eight or ten weeks.

And Trump isn’t the only one who argues that taking a strident no compromise stance on abortion will hurt Republicans nationally. As the Christian Science Monitor reported:

At a closed-door conference meeting in the Capitol earlier this month, a super PAC aligned with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell gave Senate Republicans a briefing that seemed intended to serve as a wake-up call. The Dobbs decision has “recharged the abortion debate and shifted more people (including some Republicans) into the anti-Dobbs ‘pro-choice’ camp,” the political action committee’s report stated. Some senators reportedly left the meeting brainstorming potential new labels, such as “pro-baby,” that could replace the increasingly fraught “pro-life.”

Unlike in the past, when conservative candidates could simply identify themselves as “pro-life” without having to be specific, they are now being peppered with questions about real policy choices: Should abortion be banned at the state or federal level? After how many weeks? With or without exceptions? What about abortion pill restrictions?

At one end of the 2024 spectrum are Vice President Mike Pence and South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott, who have strongly leaned into an anti-abortion message. Both candidates have endorsed a national 15-week abortion ban.

By contrast, Mr. Trump, in his “Meet the Press” interview, declined to explicitly endorse a 15-week ban, drawing a rare rebuke this week from Senator Scott. Ms. Haley has outright dismissed a national 15-week ban as unrealistic – one of the “hard truths” that she has been delivering to voters across New Hampshire and Iowa. She says the Supreme Court was “right” to send abortion back to the states.

While I understand and appreciate the 100% pro-life stance, I also want to win the White House and Senate, and expand our lead in the House, so conservatives can keep pushing on this and other issues important to us.

So, Trump may not be wrong. We need to be more tactically flexible to win the bigger war.

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

Investigators Demand FBI Turn Over Memo Detailing Foreign Biden Bribe

13
Joe Biden via Gage Skidmore Flickr

The Federal Bureau of Investigation is in possession of a document in which a Bureau source details a scheme to bribe then-Vice-President Joe Biden in exchange for policy decisions – but the agency is refusing to turn it over to congressional investigators.

House Committee on Oversight and Accountability Chairman James Comer (R-KY), working with and Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Chuck Grassley (R-IA), has subpoenaed the FBI to produce the unclassified record alleging a criminal scheme involving 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,” Comer’s office reports.  An FD-1023 form records the details of an interview with a source.

Comer subpoenaed the record on May 3, 2023 with a return date of May 10, 2023.  


The FBI has defied the subpoena, at a time when polls show a majority of Americans now view the FBI as steeped in partisan bias and working to defend Biden politically.

“It’s clear from the FBI’s response that the unclassified record the Oversight Committee subpoenaed exists, but they are refusing to provide it to the Committee,” said Comer in a statement.

“The FBI’s delay in producing a single, unclassified record is unacceptable,” said Comer. “The information provided by a whistleblower raises concerns that then-Vice President Biden allegedly engaged in a bribery scheme with a foreign national. The FBI must provide this record to Congress without further delay. The American people demand the truth and accountability for any wrongdoing. That starts with getting this record.”

“We’ve asked the FBI to not only provide this record, but to also inform us what it did to investigate these allegations. The FBI has failed to do both. The FBI’s position is ‘trust, but you aren’t allowed to verify.’ That is unacceptable,” Comer added.

“The FBI’s well-documented failures in politically sensitive investigations have eroded public confidence over the past few years. Just a few days ago, the Durham Report found that the FBI relied on unverified and inaccurate information as the foundation of its debunked Russia collusion probe. The FBI needs to take steps to restore public confidence. Flouting a legitimate congressional subpoena and dodging oversight is no way to rebuild the public trust. The FBI’s credibility is on the line, and their continued failure to cooperate will have long lasting consequences,” said Grassley.

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

Black Mom Charged With Same Crime As Hunter Biden Cites His Case In Asking For Leniency

0
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)

A Virginia mother charged with lying about her drug use when purchasing a handgun, which her six-year-old son took to school and used to wound a teacher, is asking a federal court for leniency – citing the light sentence given to President Joe Biden’s adult son Hunter for the same crime.

“Deja Taylor, 25…has pleaded guilty to lying about her marijuana use when she applied for a gun purchase. Her 6-year-old son used the 9 mm semi-automatic pistol on Jan. 6 to shoot his elementary school teacher in Newport News, Virginia, in a case that has received massive media coverage,” The Washington Times reports.

Taylor faces as much as two years in federal prison for not reporting her drug use on her gun purchase application, but her sentencing will come weeks after Biden, the wealthy white son of the President, got a sweetheart plea deal to his offense of not reporting his drug use.

While Taylor’s marijuana use is legal under Virginia law, Biden’s crack cocaine was illegal under both Delaware and federal law.

Biden received no jail time for his offense, and will likely have his guilty plea erased from his criminal record after participating in a pretrial diversion program.

Taylor may not be as lucky.

“In our sentencing memo, we will surely raise the inconsistency in the government’s approach to a vulnerable and scared very young mother, who does not have a privileged background and connections,” defense attorney Eugene Rossi told The Washington Times.

“Why does the prodigal son of a president get diversion on the same gun charge — along with the sweetheart deal on the tax crimes?” Rossi told the Times. “The disparity is a bit hard to comprehend — let alone swallow.”

While Taylor’s gun was left unsecured, and used in a school shooting, observers note Biden’s handgun was left discarded in a public trash can near a Delaware school.

Others are noticing the double standard, too.

“Biden’s DOJ is giving Hunter a sweetheart deal for lying on a firearm background check,” tweeted U.S. Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN.) “Meanwhile, the same DOJ is sending Deja Taylor to prison for 18-24 months for the exact same offense.”

“What happened to equal justice under the law?,” Blackburn asked

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