Latest

    Opinion

    Home Opinion Page 10

    Pelosi Knew – Tucker Carlson Interviews Capitol Police Chief Again over Jan 6

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    3
    Nancy Pelosi via Gage Skidmore flickr

    ANALYSIS – The original interview Tucker Carlson did with former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund about the Capitol Riot never aired on Fox News because Tucker was fired just before. Still, a lot about that interview has leaked. 

    I wrote about some of Sund’s claims earlier in August. 

    In that piece, I note that the Jan 6 riot was not a false flag operation, and most of the rioters were confirmed Trump supporters. However, in many ways, it was allowed to happen.

    But to put the entire thing on the record, Carlson did the interview again – and posted it to X, formerly known as Twitter. And it is damning to those Democrats who benefited from the Capitol Riot.

    Much of what Sund has said coincides with or dovetails with facts I have written about previously, especially how the Sergeant at Arms for both the House under Democrat Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and the Senate under Democrat Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, both declined National Guard support until it was too late.

    The same occurred with the Democrat Mayor of Washington, DC, Muriel Bowser who specifically stated that troops not be deployed unless the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) approved. 

    She added that she believed her police department was “well trained and prepared to lead the way” to ensure Jan. 6 unfolded safely. They weren’t. And they didn’t.

    This despite President Donald Trump offering the National Guard to them more than once.

    *(Note that the graphic above is incorrect in one detail – Officer Brian Sicknick was NOT killed defending the Capitol. He died later of natural causes (a stroke) unrelated to the riot.)

    In the case of Pelosi, Carlson is direct: “So this is an event that Pelosi herself has likened to Pearl Harbor and 9/11 — you know, the worst thing that’s ever happened on American soil — and she’s in charge of allowing the National Guard to come in and respond but she doesn’t for 71 minutes? What is that?”

    But Sund adds more details and perspective to the event that makes the lead up even more damning for the Democrats.

    The Blaze reported:

    In the interview, Sund indicated critical intelligence pertaining to possible threats ahead of the Jan. 6 protest was withheld from the Capitol Police and that the absence of such intelligence was cited by the congressional sergeants at arms — who were reporting to then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell at the time — as cause not to reinforce the Capitol in advance with the National Guard and federal assets.

    However, the outlet added the former Chief now understands that the intelligence was there. It just wasn’t provided to his department:

    According to the former chief, “We now know FBI [and] DHS was swimming in that intelligence. We also know now that the military seemed to have some very concerning intelligence as well,” adding that the FBI field office in Washington and other outfits “didn’t put out a single official document specific to January 6. That’s very unusual.”

    During a conference call on Jan. 5, 2021, with the leaders of the Metropolitan Police Department and the FBI Washington field office along with National Guard, military officials, and others, “not one person on that call talked about any concerns from the intelligence … that was out there.”

    “This was handled differently. … It’s almost like they wanted it to be watered down, the intelligence to be watered down for some reason,” said Sund. “It wasn’t right the way the intelligence was handled and the way we were set up on the Hill.”

    The question is – did these federal security agencies make the decisions not to forward this intelligence on their own, or where they told not to send it?

    In the interview, Sund noted that then-acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Mark Milley had “both discussed locking down the city of Washington, D.C., because they were so worried about violence at the Capitol on Jan. 6.”

    Sund added: “On Sunday and Monday, they had been discussing locking down the city, revoking permits on Capitol hill because of the concern for violence.” 

    He continued: “You know who issues the permits on Capitol Hill for demonstrations? I do. You know who wasn’t told? Me.”

    This deserves much more investigation. The Jan 6 Committee was a partisan circus and designed only to blame Trump.

    I have argued that the Pentagon leadership was extremely wary of bringing in the National Guard or any federal assets to DC due to the extreme overreaction by Democrats over Trump sending federal officers to quell riots in Portland a few months earlier.

    Democrats also were apoplectic with rage at Trump’s actions to stop violent rioters outside the White House on June 1st. 

    There was also the incessant talk in the media about Trump using the military for a ‘coup,’ which Miller has stated as a constraint several times. These all remain valid explanations for the Pentagon’s preferred inaction. 

    And maybe for the Mayor’s decision to initially reject Guard troops.

    But what about Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer? What did they know and when did they know it? And why did they veto reinforcing the Capitol till the chaos had already begun?

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

    Amanda Head: Gabrielle Union & Dwyane Wade Give Ridiculous Interview About Kid

    By
    Amanda Head
    -
    0

    Woke Hollywood has gone too far…

    Watch Amanda explain the controversy below:

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

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

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    6
    Image via Pixabay free images.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    But what about our government? Should it regulate AI?

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

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

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

    And that is a huge concern.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Keeping Track of the Criminal ‘Witch Hunt’ Against Trump

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    1
    Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    ANALYSIS – If you can’t beat him, charge him. As I wrote earlier: “From the four-year Hillary Clinton-manufactured ‘Russia collusion’ hoax to corrupt investigations to ‘deep state resistance’ within his administration to a partisan impeachment – no [other] president has been so unfairly hounded in U.S. history.”

    But the persecution clearly didn’t end with Donald Trump leaving the White House. The absolute fear he could return to office has since resulted in multiple prosecutions from idiotic nonsense such as his bookkeeping regarding hush money to a porn actress, to sexual assault that reportedly happened 30 years ago.

    But that was just the beginning, and those cases were brought by partisan local prosecutors. Now the prosecutorial floodgates have opened wider, with Joe Biden’s Department of Justice (DoJ) being weaponized to go after Trump.

    While I have blamed the ex-president for bringing the classified materials charges upon himself – see my earlier piece – there is no doubt that politics is playing a big part as well.

    And it is getting hard to keep up with all the charges and case and court timelines. His most recent indictment being related to his words and actions leading up to and during the January 6 Capitol Riot.

    “Not guilty,” Trump stressed the first word of his plea on Thursday (August 3) before Magistrate Judge Moxila Upadhyaya.

    The arraignment — U.S. special counsel Jack Smith’s second DoJ indictment against the former president — charges Trump with conspiracy to defraud the United States, obstruction, conspiracy to obstruct the Electoral College vote certification, and conspiracy against voter rights. 

    Charges that could carry serious prison time if convicted.

    With the latest four charges, Trump now faces 78 criminal counts.

    The 45-page indictment says Trump “pursued unlawful means of discounting legitimate votes and subverting the election results.”

    Trump’s next court date will be August 28, when U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, a harsh critic of January 6 defendants, and Obama-appointee, sets a trial date.

    “This is a very sad day for America,” Trump told reporters after the hearing, portraying the indictment and the other three criminal cases against him as a “witch hunt” intended to derail his 2024 presidential campaign.

    Among the criminal charges that special counsel Jack Smith released; media identified six of Trump’s former lawyers as unnamed co-conspirators in his bid to rig the elec­tion.

    They possibly are Rudy Giuliani, Trump’s former personal attorney; White House lawyer John Eastman; Trump attorney Sidney Powell; former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark; and attorney Kenneth Chesebro.

    The description of the sixth co-conspirator is a “political consultant” and is not immediately apparent — the indictment gives few details. 

    The consultant identified attorneys who could help carry out a scheme to present fake Electoral College votes to Congress as lawmakers certified the election results.

    According to the indictment, co-conspirator No. 2 is a lawyer who drafted a plan to have Vice President Mike Pence throw out Joe Biden’s Electoral Votes in Congress.

    Speaking publicly for the first time since Trump’s indictment, Pence told reporters he had hoped it wouldn’t come to a charge.

    “Sadly, the president was surrounded by a group of crackpot lawyers that kept telling him what his itching ears wanted to hear,” said Pence.

    Of the 78 charges across three criminal cases, 44 are federal and 34 state charges, all felonies, in three jurisdictions. Trump has denied wrongdoing in every case.

    However, Trump’s legal woes have done little to damage his status as a Republican front-runner. A New York Times/Siena College poll between July 23-27 showed a landslide lead of 37 percentage points over Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, his closest competitor in the Republican primary.

    Trump’s best defense against these mostly politicized prosecutions may be winning the White House in 2024.

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

    Controversial Lefty-Feminist ‘Barbie’ Movie Tops $1 Billion at Box Office

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    0

    Barbie was released in cinemas worldwide on July 21. Since then, according to Warner Bros., the colorfully controversial, left-leaning, gender-bender, fantasy-comedy movie has drawn in $459m so far in the U.S. and $572m internationally.

    That means it has already topped $1 billion overall. This is a huge global smash. But what does it say about us?

    Oscar-nominated Barbie writer and director Greta Gerwig also became the first female filmmaker to surpass the billion-dollar benchmark as a solo director, Warner Bros. said.

    Other female directors have helmed films that have surpassed the $1bn-mark, but they were working with others. Frozen, the animated blockbuster, and its sequel have generated more than $1.4bn in box office takings and were co-directed by Jennifer Lee and Chris Buck.

    Meanwhile, Captain Marvel, starring Brie Larson and co-directed by Anna Boden and Ryan Fleck, generated more than $1.1bn at the box office.

    But what is the very pink themed movie, starring Margot Robbie (the primary Barbie) and Ryan Gosling (the primary Ken), about? What is its messaging?  

    The feminist comedy with a PG-13 rating’s plot hinges on Barbie leaving her fake but perfectly idealized world behind and, like Pinocchio before her, becoming “real.” 

    That’s when it gets political and goes straight into lefty social issues like ‘the patriarchy,’ and gender confusion-fusion.

    Elon Musk mocked the film on ‘X,’ formerly known as Twitter, saying: “If you take a shot every time Barbie says the word ‘Patriarchy,’ you will pass out before the movie ends.”

    Conservatives have derided the Barbie movie’s anti-male themes, and inclusion of a trans-gender actor/actress playing one of the Barbies. The critics include journalist Piers Morgan and commentator Ben Shapiro. Newsweek reported:

    “If I made a movie mocking women as useless dunderheads, constantly attacking ‘the matriarchy,’ and depicting all things feminist as toxic bulls***, I wouldn’t just be canceled, I’d be executed,” Morgan wrote in his columns for British newspaper The Sun and The New York Post after seeing the Barbie movie.

    Shapiro meanwhile went as far as to burn a Barbie and Ken doll on Saturday, after seeing the movie the night before. The following Monday he claimed he had received death threats for his stunt.”

    Writing for the New York Post, Morgan added: “the movie achieves exactly what it wanted to achieve and that is to establish the matriarchy as the perfect antidote to the patriarchy when in fact it’s just the same concept that they asked us all to detest in the first place.”

    The movie “forgets its core audience of families and children while catering to nostalgic adults and pushing lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender character stories,” wrote a contributor to Movieguide, a site with a conservative Christian bent.

    Ginger Gaetz, wife of conservative Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz, posted on ‘X’ that at the premiere, she saw “disappointingly low T from Ken,” referring to testosterone, and she also called him a “beta” male, not an alpha. 

    Less politically, Time said: “Barbie never lets us forget how clever it’s being, every exhausting minute.”

    Mattel has a lot riding on its $100m Barbie movie, the first of a planned slew of films from the toy-making behemoth that include Masters of the Universe, Barney, Hot Wheels and Magic 8 Ball, to name but a few.

    The Barbie doll was launched by Mattel in 1959, when the toy-maker itself was only 14 years old, and has sold over a billion units over six decades.

    Today, Barbie is still considered Mattel’s crown jewel, driving about a third of its $5 billion annual revenue.

    Since 2018, Mattel has been working on a strategy to license its intellectual properties to Hollywood, to reverse a sales decline over recent years. The new movie was a big gamble for Mattel Films.

    A hit would boost toy sales, a flop would have done the opposite – threatening other projects currently in pre-production. But the gamble has clearly paid off.

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

    Biden’s Migrant Invasion to Make NYC’s Central Park a Homeless ‘Tent City’

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    4
    Bryan Ledgard, CC BY 2.0 via Wikimedia Commons

    ANALYSIS – Welcome to ‘Biden World’ – where much of America has quickly devolved into a third-world country. On top of the rampant crime and homelessness plaguing many Democrat-run cities, now add the disaster of adding millions of unemployed, unhoused, illegal foreigners to our city streets, thanks to Joe Biden’s immigration crisis.

    Democrats and the media ignored the crisis while it mostly affected El Paso or other GOP-run border towns and states. But with the ‘political stunt’ by Republican governors to send Biden’s illegal migrants to Democrat states and cities, things are now getting real for them.

    Now places like New York City are seeing the carnage from the national inundation of illegals in their hoods. Things have gotten so bad in the Big Apple, with thousands of new migrants coming each week, that NYC officials are considering housing illegal immigrants in the world-famous Central Park.

    As reported by The Blaze:

    …New York City Mayor Eric Adams already said that “from this moment on, it’s downhill. There is no more room,” while his office acknowledged that more than 95,000 migrants have arrived in since spring 2022.

    With hotels at capacity, hundreds of migrants have been seen sleeping on city sidewalks, often on pieces of cardboard, littering the streets with trash and clothing in what look like extremely inhumane conditions.

    “Everything is on the table,” Deputy Mayor for Health and Human Services Anne Williams-Isom said Wednesday at a press conference, according to Bloomberg. The city is reportedly looking at 3,000 locations for possible housing relief.

    Williams-Isom added that “the system is at a breaking point” in response to questions about housing the migrants in parks.

    While NYC Dems whine about having a couple of thousand migrants arriving every week (see tweet below), Texas Senator Ted Cruz tweeted his response:

    “Come to South Texas. We’d LOVE to have only 2100 per week. (At over 7m under Biden, we’re looking at over 50,000 per week….)”

    While Central Park would be the most damning location for a migrant homeless camp in Manhattan,  The Gothamist reported that the city is also at Prospect Park in Brooklyn and Randalls Island, as other tent city options. The New York Daily News also reported on a plan to house migrants on soccer fields, which prompted outrage from locals whose facilities would be taken over.

    But it’s not just Biden’s insane policies that are creating this crisis. Democrat-run cities exacerbate and fuel the crisis with their own insane policies.

    Only two months ago, NYC enacted a “Homeless Bill of Rights” which gives anyone the right to sleep outdoors in public places, and the right to be assigned an area in a public space that corresponds to ‘one’s gender identity.’

    If homeless persons, including illegal foreigners, aren’t happy, the NYC law gives them the right to complain about their emergency shelter accommodations without any repercussions.

    Welcome to Biden and then Democrats’ third-world America.

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

    Ex-Capitol Police Chief: J6 Riot Not False Flag, But Allowed to Happen

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    4
    Elvert Barnes, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

    ANALYSIS – From the beginning, conspiracies surrounded the Capitol Riot on January 6, 2021. Stunned conservatives couldn’t believe Republicans caused that mayhem. Some called it a deliberate false flag operation by the feds to entrap innocent Trump supporters and launch a massive witch hunt. 

    Both last two things did occur.

    Meanwhile, the Democrats and media called the afternoon event an attempted coup and later more steadily ‘the insurrection.’

    It was neither. But it also wasn’t a well-orchestrated false flag operation. The truth is just as bad but less planned.

    I was at the Capitol on Jan 6 as a security contractor for a foreign TV news crew, and I condemned the violence the next day. I wrote that the, at times, violent riot wasn’t a coup, or an insurrection but the violence was criminal behavior, and should be punished.

    I also noted that the rioters all appeared to be passionate Trump supporters, and not likely a false flag operation by the feds, or ANTIFA infiltrators.

    Since then, I have defended many of the peaceful protesters unfairly caught up in the FBI dragnet and harshly charged for minor nonviolent crimes. 

    I have also written about the large number of undercover police and federal agents and their informants since identified at the Capitol that day. And I have noted how the Democrats in charge of the House and Senate that day refused National Guard support, as did the Democrat mayor of DC.

    At least until it was too late.

    Now, former Capitol Hill Police Chief Steven Sund has added his insight into the events. And he claims that it seems as if they wanted something to happen.

    Sund resigned from his post shortly after the riots. He had been chief of the Capitol Police since 2019 and had served as a police officer for more than 30 years in total.

    Newsmax reported on his untelevised interview with Tucker Carlson taped before Carlson was fired from Fox News:

    “Everything appears to be a cover-up,” Sund told Carlson. “I’m not a conspiracy theorist … but when you look at the information and intelligence they had, the military had, it’s all watered down. I’m not getting intelligence, I’m denied any support from National Guard in advance. I’m denied National Guard while we’re under attack, for 71 minutes …”

    … “Could there possibly be actually … they kind of wanted something to happen? It’s not a far stretch to begin to think that. It’s sad when you start putting everything together and thinking about the way this played out … what was their end goal?”

    Sund told Carlson he believes that Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley and then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., had intelligence of what was coming on Jan. 6 but failed to communicate it and subsequently covered it up.

    “If I was allowed to do my job as the chief we wouldn’t be here; this didn’t have to happen,” he said.

    Carlson also said on Russel Brand’s podcast that Sund told him:  ‘Oh yeah, that crowd was filled with federal agents.’

    This all fits neatly with much of what I have noted previously. But while I blamed Democrat leaders for holding back needed support to defend the Capitol for other political reasons, Sund seems to believe they held it back because they started hoping for a big chaotic show they could then turn into a political circus.

    And the chaos ensued, and so did their circus.

    Sadly, Donald Trump and some of his supporters fell for the trap.

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

    Amanda Head: Biden Admin in Cahoots with Big Media to Hide the Truth!

    By
    Amanda Head
    -
    1

    The truth is finally coming out!

    Watch Amanda explain the controversy below:

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

    Trump Indicted Again – This One Could Be Serious

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    3
    Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    ANALYSIS – Donald Trump has been wrongly persecuted since he was elected president in 2016. From the 4-year long Hillary Clinton-manufactured ‘Russia collusion’ hoax, to corrupt investigations, to ‘deep state ‘resistance’ within his administration, to a partisan impeachment — no president has been so unfairly hounded in U.S. history.

    And now, we have the multiple indictments against him, including the ones for poor bookkeeping in the Stormy Daniels nonsense, and the “I can’t remember exactly when it happened, but Trump raped me 30 years ago” case of E. Jean Carrol.

    We have seen a lot of proverbial ‘stuff’ thrown at this Republican leader. Most of it stinks of political persecution. Few of it has stuck. And I have defended him through much of it.

    But the latest federal criminal indictments are different. Yes, they are, of course, politicized. 

    The Department of Justice (DoJ) under the thumb of a president from the other party, and an opponent in the next election, accusing an ex-president of federal crimes, can’t be anything but political.

    And that will hold a lot of sway, especially with Republican voters.

    Still, these latest indictments are far more serious and dangerous for Trump.

    I have previously argued that Trump brought the Mar-a-Lago classified documents charges onto himself. 

    In part he did this by not turning over the sensitive materials when requested, by bragging about having them, by claiming he declassified them, and by jerking federal investigators around for 18 months.

    Trump basically dared them to come after him. And they obliged. First by raiding his Mar-a-Lago home. Then, by indicting him.

    Neither Joe Biden, nor Mike Pence did these things when they were found to have classified materials in their possession. They just turned them over.

    Note – Trump was not charged for any materials he did return earlier in the process. He could have avoided the entire legal ordeal had he just returned all the classified documents, instead of hiding them in bathrooms.

    Those charges carry real jail time; if they stick, and a Florida jury convicts him. Those are two big ‘ifs.’

    But Donald Trump now faces new criminal charges for the fourth time in five months, arising from efforts to overturn the 2020 election results.

    In total, Trump faces 78 criminal counts. Any one of them can land the ex-president in federal prison. 

    The federal crimes with which Justice Department prosecutors have now charged the former president involve three conspiracies; conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct certification of the Electoral College vote and Conspiracy Against Rights.

    Trump was also charged with obstruction. All can carry prison time if convicted.

    Conspiracy to Defraud the United States makes it a crime for two or more people to “conspire either to commit any offence against the United States or to defraud the United States” or any federal agency and for one of them to perform some action that would affect the object of the conspiracy, which carries a fine or maximum prison sentence of five years if convicted.

    Obstruction of an Official Proceeding criminalizes “obstructing, influencing, or impeding any official proceeding” or attempting to do so, which is punishable by a fine or up to 20 years in prison.

    Obstruction charges relate to Trump’s alleged attempts to block Congress from certifying the Electoral College vote. The January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol building postponed the vote count.

    According to the New York Times, he isn’t the only charged in these conspiracies:

    The indictment identified six individuals as co-conspirators in Trump’s effort to overturn the election, but none of those people were charged Tuesday. Though the alleged co-conspirators were not named, the descriptions correspond to a cabal of Trump lawyers who embraced increasingly fringe strategies as Trump’s bid to remain in power faltered. They include Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman, Kenneth Chesebro and Sidney Powell.

    Trump is scheduled to appear in federal court in Washington, D.C., on Thursday afternoon for an initial court appearance before a magistrate judge. 

    He is expected to plead not guilty.

    However, unlike the classified materials case in Florida, where a Trump appointed judge is in charge, this time Trump’s case has been initially ‘randomly’ assigned to U.S. District Court Tanya Chutkan, an Obama-appointed judge who has been among the harshest critics of Jan. 6 defendants.

    She appears anything but fair-minded.

    As I said, political, or not – these indictments could be very serious.

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

    Democrat Mayor Wanted Less White, Military Men In Police Recruiting Images

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    4

    ANALYSIS – Even though, after the recent Supreme Court ruling against Affirmative Action, the momentum seems to be shifting away from discriminatory Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) efforts nationally, one major, crime-infested, ‘Defund the Police’ city on the Left coast hasn’t gotten the message.

    Seattle’s Democrat Mayor Bruce Harrell’s office ordered fewer White males and officers with ‘military bearing’ be shown in promotional images and videos for the city’s struggling police force.

    The controversial document appears to be part of the mayor’s Comprehensive Police Recruitment and Retention Plan passed last year which prioritizes applicants with “diverse racial and immigration backgrounds.” 

    It was first reported by My Northwest.

    Once the memo provoked a firestorm of protest, the document was quietly edited to remove the offensive verbiage. Then the mayor’s office lied about having copies of the original memo, saying the original versions were lost.

    This, according to a March 2023 memo written for the Seattle Police Department (SPD), titled “SPD Marketing More and Less,” calls for more photos and videos of “officers of color” who are “younger” and of “different genders” to be featured in the department’s marketing materials. 

    And to make the overtly discriminatory point as clear as possible, the memo also directed that there should be “less” images and videos of “officers who are white, male” and “officers with military bearing.” 

    The outrageous memo was written by Ben Dalgetty, a Digital Strategy Lead from the mayor’s office who oversees SPD recruitment. And it got the Seattle Police Officers Guild justifiably upset.

    Officer Mike Solan, president of the police union told Seattle radio host Jason Rantz in a written statement that the union cannot abide by “discrimination.” 

    “What I condemn and will forever continue to push back on is the verbiage within the recruitment document that calls for less of white male officers. Less of people in leadership positions, and less of humans with military backgrounds. This is flat-out discrimination. Period. It is an affront to decency, reasonableness and further divides our communities,” Sloan wrote.

    “It is embarrassing, shameful, and detrimental to a healthy functioning society.” But he wasn’t the only one outraged by the memo.

    According to My Northwest, police sources who spoke to “The Jason Rantz Show” were shocked that the mayor’s office would put their radical racial and other preferences for police recruitment in writing.

    “I thought, ‘Are you kidding me? You put this in writing?'” one SPD source reportedly said. “It shows not only a lack of respect for officers, but a lack of respect for the military. They have no understanding of someone willing to put their lives on the line for their fellow man. They don’t have respect.”

    Other SPD officials were “livid” with the memo. After receiving complaints from SPD, Dalgetty made several edits to the document.

    “The Jason Rantz Show” said their public records request for the original memo went unanswered for months before the mayor’s office finally provided the edited version on July 10, but wrongly claimed the original version wasn’t available anymore.

    Meanwhile, there were 52 homicides in Seattle in 2022, and last year had the highest number of violent crimes with 5,625, the most in over 10 years of Seattle crime statistics.

    And, since 2020, and the Black Lives Matter riots, the SPD has had a net loss of 325 officers. Last year, it was a net loss of 90 cops, despite Mayor Harrell’s much-publicized diverse recruitment efforts.

    At the same time, the left-wing city council and two different Democrat mayors have talked for nearly three years about forming teams of social workers or mental health counselors to respond to some calls instead of police.

    But the fact is that 300-plus cops who used to respond to an increasing number of 911 calls are gone — and haven’t been replaced with anything real. 

    Still, city officials have the audacity to discriminate against the remaining white male officers with ‘military bearing’ who remain.

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

    1...91011...38Page 10 of 38
    © Great America News Desk 2022