Opinion

Home Opinion

State Department Sued For Labeling Trump ‘Disinformation Purveyor’

1
(Miami - Flórida, 09/03/2020) Presidente da República Jair Bolsonaro durante encontro com o Senador Marco Rubio..Foto: Alan Santos/PR

The United States Department of State is being sued for documents detailing a Biden administration scheme that censored the political speech of Americans and labeled President Donald Trump a “disinformation purveyor.”

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. State Department for all records which allege President Trump or any current or former member of his cabinet are ‘purveyors of disinformation.’”

“The Biden censorship operation was compiling files on his political enemies from Trump world. The State Department should immediately disclose the records about this abuse, as FOIA requires,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

Judicial Watch states in the complaint:

According to media reports on April 30, 2025, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that the State Department labeled a member of President Trump’s cabinet as a purveyor of disinformation, compiling a dossier of social media posts from the unnamed cabinet member. See, e.g., “Rubio says State had dossier accusing Trump Cabinet member of disinformation,” The Hill, April 30, 2025 

Judicial Watch reports it sued the State Department after “it failed to respond to a May 1, 2025, FOIA request for records, including those of the Global Engagement Center (GEC), about social media posts of any current or former member of President Donald Trump’s cabinet, to include Trump himself, alleged to constitute misinformation, disinformation, or malign influence. Judicial Watch also asked for any guidance or policy documents.”

Judicial Watch notes that during an April 30, 2025, Cabinet meeting, Rubio said, “We had an office in the Department of State whose job it was to censor Americans.”

Rep. Bill Huizenga (R-MI), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs South and Central Asia Subcommittee, said at a hearing in April about the center: “The GEC [Global Engagement Center] was initially authorized for the statutory purpose of countering foreign propaganda and disinformation efforts. Despite that mandate, for years the GEC instead deployed its shadowy network of grantees and sub-grantees to facilitate the censorship of American voices …”

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

The other Soros: Senator Reveals How this Liberal Swiss Billionaire Has Been Funneling Cash into US Elections

2
Image via Pixabay free images

A left-wing Swiss billionaire has been bankrolling the voting systems used in American elections, with an alleged bias toward liberals, a U.S. senator reveals.

United States Senator Bill Hagerty (R-TN), a member of the Senate Rules Committee, pressed Benjamin Hovland, Vice Chair of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC), on foreign influence in U.S. elections through what he called “a new form of Zuckerbucks: partisan, foreign-backed funding for local election administrators through the U.S. Alliance for Election Excellence.”

Hagerty calls it a “highly problematic scheme in which left-wing organizations provide substantial, foreign-funded resources for conducting American elections at the local level.”

Much of the funding comes from Hansjörg Wyss, a Swiss billionaire and multi-million dollar donor to left-wing causes through his “Hub Project.”

“This is an $80 million initiative, funded by a web of left-wing entities, to ‘help’ local election administrators conduct elections,” Hagerty explained. “It’s a new form of ‘Zuckerbucks,’ is what it is. This network of entities has received tens—if not hundreds—of millions of dollars from a foreign left-wing billionaire named Hansjörg Wyss. He’s not a U.S. Citizen, so he can’t contribute directly to our elections, but he’s found a way to be involved in our elections.”

“After being repeatedly pressed by Hagerty to acknowledge whether foreign donations used to conduct American elections are acceptable, Vice Chair Hovland conceded that this interference is inappropriate,” a statement from Hagerty’s office reveals.

“Absolutely not. Of course not,” Vice Chair Hovland answered. 

“I want to be clear with that because what this is is Zuckerbucks 2.0 coming from a foreign billionaire involving themselves in our elections. What I want to make certain is that this Commission—that no Election Assistance Commission dollars are commingled in any way with these foreign funds,” said Hagerty.

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

Poll: Americans Oppose US Involvement In Iran, Believe US Should Stay Out Of Other Countries’ Business

3

A new poll finds overwhelming majorities of Americans oppose the U.S. government’s military strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities and believe the federal government should stay out of other countries’ disputes.

Reuters/Ipsos reports their new poll finds “most Americans support immediately ending U.S. involvement in the conflict with Iran. The poll also finds that Americans oppose U.S. military involvement in the Middle East unless the U.S. is directly threatened and that most Americans do not feel that U.S. airstrikes against Iran make America safer.”

Only 36 percent of Americans support the strikes, with 45 percent opposing.  

A whopping 69 percent of Americans, including 57 percent of Republicans, oppose “any military action in the Middle East unless America is directly threatened”.

58 percent of Americans say “it is better for the nation if the U.S. stays out of the affairs of other nations”

Republicans generally opposed U.S. strikes on Iran when Democrats Barack Obama and Joe Biden were president, warning it would lead to “World War 3.”  They now report supporting the policy under Republican President Donald Trump.

Reuters summarized the findings, noting:

* Seven in ten say they have been following the U.S. airstrikes against Iran (70%) or the war between Israel and Iran (67%) very or somewhat closely. Republicans are slightly more likely to say they are following the U.S. airstrikes very closely (39%) compared to Democrats (32%), independents (31%), and the general population (33%).

* Four in five Americans say they are concerned with the conflict growing between the U.S. and Iran (84%) and U.S. military personnel stationed in the Middle East (79%). In comparison, similar numbers of Americans are concerned about rising inflation (81%) and growing U.S. debt (78%).

* Republicans (69% support, 17% oppose) are significantly more likely to support the strikes compared to Democrats (13% support, 74% oppose) and independents (29% support, 48% oppose).

* Just over one in three Americans (36%) say they agree that U.S. airstrikes against Iran make America safer, while 60% disagree and 4% refused or skipped. This is heavily divided along partisan lines, with 12% of Democrats, 29% of independents, and 67% of Republicans agreeing with this statement.

* Most Americans say the U.S. should not become involved in any military action in the Middle East unless America is directly threatened (69%). Majorities across partisanship feel this way, with 57% of Republicans, 73% of independents, and 80% of Democrats agreeing with this statement. 

“This Reuters/Ipsos poll was conducted June 21-23, 2025. The poll began fielding immediately after the June 21 U.S. strikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities. The poll closed before the June 23 Iranian strikes on a U.S. military base in Qatar, which has reportedly caused no fatalities,” Reuters notes.

Amanda Head: Late Night TV Hits Rock Bottom

3

Things are going downhill at an alarming rate…

Watch Amanda explain the situation below:

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

Biden Lied About Classified Documents Found at His Homes and Office

0
Photo via Pixabay images

ANALYSIS – While much of the establishment media dutifully informed us that Special Counsel Robert Hur’s recent interview of Joe Biden regarding his alleged mishandling of classified materials signals the investigation is ending, ‘with nothing there,’ it could just be the beginning.

In a bombshell new discovery, it appears that Biden may have been lying about those classified documents all along.

I have previously noted that former president Donald Trump improperly held on to classified documents mostly out of vanity, gave multiple bogus justifications for having them, refused to give them all back, moved them around, and essentially dared the Biden Department of Justice (DoJ) to come after him – which it did.

Had he returned all the materials he had in his possession, I have argued, DoJ likely would not have raided his Mar-a-Lago home and found damning evidence to indict him. None of the charges against Trump in that case are tied to materials he earlier returned to authorities.

Biden, and former vice president Mike Pence, seemed to have behaved quite differently when they discovered classified materials. Both supposedly quickly returned documents they had held improperly at their homes or private offices. 

This was a big difference with Trump’s actions.

Well, that may be true of Pence, but not of Biden, who seems to have a much more tangled web of deceit surrounding his classified materials that date back to his time as vice president and even senator.

As Jonathan Turley, Professor of Public Interest Law at the George Washington University Law School notes in The Hill: “The most glaring problem [with Biden’s case] is that, after they were removed at the end of his term as vice president, the documents were repeatedly moved and divided up.”

That sounds a lot like what Trump did, but going back much farther, and for potentially far more sinister motives.

Turley added:

Biden made clear from the beginning that he expected the investigation to be perfunctory and brief. He publicly declared that he has “no regrets” over his own conduct and told the public that the documents investigation would soon peter out when it determined that “there is no ‘there’ there.”

Now, however, it appears that a critical claim by the White House in the scandal may not only be false but was knowingly false at the time it was made. The White House and Biden’s counsel have long maintained that, as soon as documents were discovered in the D.C. office, they notified the national archives. Many asked why they did not call the FBI, but the White House has at least maintained that, unlike Trump, they took immediate action to notify authorities.

However, it now appears that this was not true. One of the closest aides to Biden and a close friend to Hunter Biden is Annie Tomasini. She referred to Hunter as her “brother” and signed off messages with “LY” or “love you.”

Tomasini was once a senior aide to Joe Biden and, according to the Oversight Committee, inspected the classified material on March 18, 2021, two months after Biden took office — nearly 20 months before they were said to be found by the Biden team.

The Oversight Committee released a new timeline of when the classified documents were discovered.

As Turley notes, “the committee now alleges that the White House “omitted months of communications, planning, and coordinating among multiple White House officials, [Kathy] Chung, Penn Biden Center employees, and President Biden’s personal attorneys to retrieve the boxes containing classified materials.”

This is huge. It means Biden repeatedly lied about when his staff discovered classified materials in his private residences and offices, and Team Biden had 20 months to tamper with, hide or otherwise dispose of evidence.

While a sitting president can’t be indicted according to existing DoJ policy, that could be changed. Beyond that, this new information has already been added to an increasingly heated impeachment inquiry by the GOP-led House.

The question being asked now by House Committee on Oversight and Accountability Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) is: How many of the documents improperly kept by Biden related to the countries the Biden family engaged with as part of their alleged foreign influence peddling scheme?

If there were any, that could mean there is “a lot more ‘there,’ there,” than Biden claimed.

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

Did Biden Appoint a Chinese Mole? GOP Lawmakers Demand FBI Investigate

10
Joe Biden via Gage Skidmore Flickr

ANALYSIS – While Joe Biden’s weak response to the Chinese spy balloon that crossed the entire country before being shot down has put him under pressure, Biden is now also under fire for possibly appointing a Chinese Communist Party (CCP) mole to a U.S. government post focused on Asia.

And several Republican lawmakers are demanding the FBI investigate.

The suspected Chinese communist mole, or spy, is Dominic Ng, CEO of East West Bank, appointed by Biden to represent the U.S. at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC).

In a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray the lawmakers wrote: “We request the FBI investigate and provide a report to Congress on the extent of Mr. Ng’s knowledge of sensitive information, as well as any potential violations of The Espionage Act.” 

The lawmakers add: “The Biden Administration has allowed the CCP to infiltrate the third-party sector and, consequently, political leaders that have existing relationships to these groups and are privy to U.S. intelligence.”

According to the Daily Caller News Foundation (DCNF), Ng is a current and former member of two alleged front groups serving a “Chinese intelligence service.”

According to the Daily Caller: “Ng served as ‘executive director’ of the China Overseas Exchange Association until 2017 and still serves in that capacity at the related China Overseas Friendship Association, according to DCNF translations of those groups’ archived rosters.”

Multiple China intelligence analysts have identified these two entities as front groups for China’s United Front Work Department (UFWD), a Chinese intelligence service.

UFWD is tasked with infiltrating U.S. and other foreign political parties, conducting ‘influence’ operations, and collecting intelligence.

In 2020, Ng helped grease the wheels for his appointment by donating $100,000 to the Biden Victory Fund and $35,500 to the Democratic National Committee in 2020.

The Daily Caller reports that Ng’s CCP ties first came under scrutiny in April 2022, when Biden appointed the banker to a one-year position representing the U.S. on the Business Advisory Council of APEC, soon after he made his large political donations. 

Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio called Ng’s alleged CCP ties “beyond disturbing and concerning” in a Feb. 10 tweet. 

Texas Republican Rep. Lance Gooden told the DCNF: “President Biden ignored Dominic Ng’s extensive ties to the CCP and Chinese intelligence groups, happily took his campaign donations, and in return appointed a possible Chinese spy to a senior government position.” 

Gooden added that Ng was “compromised at best and a traitor at worst.”

But this one appointee is only the tip of the Chinese infiltration of the U.S. political system, primarily via the Democrat Party in California. 

We all know California Democrat Rep. Eric Swalwell, who was compromised by an attractive female Chinese spy aptly called Fang Fang, even as he served on the House Intelligence Committee.

The letter notes how other influential Democrat politicians from California may also be linked to the CCP:

Prior to his appointment to APEC, California Democratic Representative Judy Chu advocated for Mr. Ng’s nomination to be the U.S. Secretary of Commerce. Like Mr. Ng, California Representative Judy Chu is the “honorary president” for the All America Chinese Youth Federations (AACYF), a 501(c)(3) non-profit whose mission is to strengthen the social impact of the Chinese community within the U.S.

However, under Representative Chu’s tenure, five of AACYF’s leaders have been alleged members of organizations belonging to UFWD.

The letter signed by six Republican members of Congress, Lance Gooden and Keith Self of Texas, Tom Tiffany of Wisconsin, Lauren Boebert of Colorado, Ben Cline of Virginia and Doug LaMalfa of California, adds: 

China has proved themselves as our greatest adversary and foreign competitor, and yet our leaders continuously jeopardize U.S. national security by allowing the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to infiltrate our third-party sector and federal government.

The letter continues: “This lack of scrutiny should be promptly evaluated, and the Biden Administration should take immediate steps to ensure blunders like this will not happen again.”

“These are incredibly troubling disclosures,” Tiffany told the DCNF. “The FBI ought to be taking a very serious look at them.”

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

Biden’s Lies About Hunter’s Foreign Influence Peddling Are About To Blow Up In His Face

6
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 – Where there’s smoke there’s fire. And there is a lot of smoke surrounding Joe and Hunter Biden. It is increasingly clear that Joe Biden has repeatedly lied about his involvement in, and knowledge of, his son Hunter’s overseas influence peddling businesses.

And with Biden’s Department of Justice (DoJ) and FBI dragging their feet with documents requested by congressional investigators, an official impeachment inquiry may be the only way to get to the truth.

And that official inquiry may be coming very soon.

Republicans could open an impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden over ties to his son Hunter’s shady and unethical business entanglements when Congress reconvenes on September 12.

In the final presidential debate of the 2020 U.S. election between President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joseph Biden, moderator Kristen Welker asked Biden: “there have been questions about the work your son has done in China and for a Ukrainian energy company when you were vice president; in retrospect, was anything about those relationships inappropriate or unethical?”

“Nothing was unethical. My son has not made money in terms of this thing about, what are you talking about, China,” Biden replied.

Biden also said he never discussed business with his son.

Well, to put it in Biden terms, that was all a bunch of malarkey.

Now, nearly three years later, Hunter has rebutted Joe Biden’s assertions directly. In court testimony in late June, Hunter acknowledged that he had been paid substantial sums in China – the first official confirmation that this was the case.

This direct contradiction creates a major problem for the White House, and Republicans insist there’s a lot more to find out.

“A lot of the things the president said about his family’s shady business dealings, we’re proving every day that they’re not true,” Republican James Comer, Chair of the Oversight and Accountability Committee, said.

An impeachment inquiry is the next logical step to find out what is true.

The Epoch Times (ET) reported: “House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said that initiating an impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden would be a ‘natural step forward.’” This, following unresolved questions from the House Oversight and Accountability Committee’s investigations into the Biden family’s business dealings.

The speaker said on Monday that the impeachment inquiry could start soon. McCarthy added that an impeachment inquiry would provide Congress “the apex of legal power to get all the information they need” to investigate whether President Biden misused his office to assist family businesses.

ET continued:

McCarthy said on Monday that the inquiry was needed to overcome stonewalling of congressional investigators looking for transparency about the Biden family’s business records following testimony from former Hunter Biden associate Devon Archer that President Biden met with son Hunter Biden’s business partners during the time he was vice president, as well as concerns raised by whistleblowers at the IRS regarding Hunter Biden’s tax records.

The House Oversight and Accountability Committee has so far subpoenaed six different banks, receiving thousands of bank records of businesses and individuals connected to Joe Biden’s family members.

According to ET:

Those records showed that more than $20 million in payments from foreign sources have been made to the president’s relatives, including Hunter Biden, and their business associates while Mr. Biden was acting as U.S. vice president from 2009 to 2017.

Romanian, Chinese, and Russian nationals were among those making payments to the Biden family and their associates. The records also revealed that the funds were funneled through a network of at least 20 shell companies before being transferred to Biden family members.

An inquiry doesn’t mean the House will impeach Biden. But it does give Republicans far more legal power to force reluctant Biden DoJ bureaucrats and others to come forward with the truth.

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

Ex-CIA Officer Proposes Using ‘Counterterror’ Measures Against ‘Right-wing’ Americans

1
Gage Skidmore Flickr

ANALYSIS – Can we say dangerous left-wing intelligence hack? 

With Joe Biden and the Democrats demonizing conservatives, partisan, out-of-work former intelligence officers, without much of a ‘war on terror’ to fight anymore, and looking for new work, are now targeting Americans as their new terrorist bogeyman. 

And following the bizarre ‘underwear hammer attack’ on Nancy Pelosi’s husband in San Francisco, the Democrats are on a tear blaming Republicans for violence.

This is despite the fact that the Pelosi attacker was a crazy, life-long pot-smoking hippie, left-wing nudist, and illegal alien from Canada who only started making ‘right-wing’ social media posts a few weeks ago.

But once you designate your domestic political opponents as ‘extremists’ and ‘enemies of democracy,’ you open the door to widespread abuse and repression by the state.

And targeting American citizens as if they were ISIS is the result.

As I noted earlier, we should expect to see a host of these former ‘counter-extremism’ hacks try to parlay their experiences against al-Qaeda to use against their fellow citizens.

This is the old Cold War ‘Red Scare’ in reverse.

And this is just the latest example. A partisan former CIA officer proposing we illegally use ‘counterterror’ measures against Americans.

As Fox News reports:

Former Senior Intelligence Service officer at the CIA, Marc Polymeropoulos published a Sunday piece declaring that technique once used to fight radical Islam should be turned against the right-wing in America.

Polymeropoulos’ piece for NBC News Think warned that propagandists, whether Islamic terrorists or Republicans, should be subject to counterterrorism and counter-radicalization techniques.

“I worked in counterterrorism operations for nearly my entire career at the CIA before retiring in 2019. The battle we engaged in with international terrorist groups like Al Qaeda wasn’t just with their legions of foot soldiers but with their highly effective propaganda arms as well,” he wrote. 

“The U.S. and our allies considered those propagandists fundamental cogs in a terror group’s machinery, and just as culpable as any other terrorist. So we held them accountable when innocent civilians were killed.”

Polymeropoulos suggested that the attack of Paul Pelosi was evidence that the American government needs to take a firmer approach to its own citizenry.

This type of thinking is outrageous on so many levels. Simply un-American. Unconstitutional. And extremely dangerous.

Polymeropoulos, who sounds more like a left-wing extremist than an intelligence officer, is also either willfully ignorant or outright deceptive when he claims that the American right has some sort of monopoly on violent rhetoric. 

He laughably states that there is “nothing equivalent being done on the other side of the aisle” as far as promoting violence against their political opposition. 

“Democratic politicians and leaders may not like Trump, but they don’t call for violence against him, let alone his execution,” he outrageously claimed.

Of course, this is outright false.

As Fox Notes: “He neglected to mention multiple incidents of left-wing calls to arms and violence against Republicans…”

Fox added examples:

In 2017, a far-left former Bernie Sanders campaign volunteer named James T. Hodgkinson fired upon on a group of Republican lawmakers as they practiced for the annual Congressional Baseball Game, critically injuring House Republican Whip Steve Scalise.

Democrats didn’t equate their own hyper-aggressive anti-GOP rhetoric with his violent actions.

And let’s be clear Democrat politicians do incite violence against their GOP opponents.

Fox continues:

Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., endorsed harassing political opposition in public in 2018. “They’re not going to be able to go to a restaurant, they’re not going to be able to stop at a gas station, they’re not going to be able to shop at a department store,” Waters proclaimed at the time. “The people are going to turn on them, they’re going to protest, they’re going to absolutely harass them.”

Polymeropoulos also ignores left-wing activists protesting in front of the houses of Supreme Court justices, firebombing crisis pregnancy centers, and doxing (posting the addresses of public figures online). 

Not to mention the assassination attempt against Justice Brett Kavanaugh by a heavily armed man at his home.

Recall that in 2020, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., warned Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh that they “will pay the price” for rulings against abortion and “You won’t know what hit you.”

Can we say “incitement to violence” against Justices?

This ex-CIA hack also overlooks a full year of left-wing politically motivated riots in cities, often encouraged and enabled by Democrat politicians and ‘community’ leaders.

But facts, consistency, and fairness aren’t needed when you are a political hack trying to get the all-powerful government to use your now unneeded skills to target your fellow Americans who disagree with you.

All you need is your own extremist leftist rhetoric.

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

Amanda Head: Dodgers Host Christian Faith Event!

0

We had to see this for ourselves! Los Angeles Dodgers hosted a Christian faith event at the ballpark…

See how the night went:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

And we can’t have that.

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

And it just got a lot worse.

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

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

The Daily Signal reports:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Daily Signal concludes:

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

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

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