Opinion

Home Opinion Page 21

House GOP Targets Anti-Christian Military Lobbying Group

1

*Warning: This article contains some graphic language.

ANALYSIS – For those conservatives who say that Republicans are weak or ineffective, take note of all the actions this GOP-led House has taken so far. And with only the slimmest of majorities. The latest effort targets a distasteful anti-Christian group that focuses on influencing Pentagon policy.

While operating under the misleading name of the ‘Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF), this advocacy group is anything but an organization for religious freedom. Its real mission is to attack and remove any Christian influences from our entire military.

In February, for example, the MRFF convinced Merchant Marine Academy leaders to move a massive historical painting titled “Christ on the Water” from a public space to a chapel.

This move was attacked by Republican lawmakers and Christian groups as gross overreach, especially since it was a historical item and part of the Academy’s proud heritage.

But the Academy caved quickly to the group’s outrageous demand.

The aggressive actions of the group have raised concerns among lawmakers for years, with ill-informed military staffers often overreacting to the group’s incessant, and at times inappropriate, demands without following proper review procedures.

Thankfully, the GOP House has it in its sights.

Under an amendment to the House draft of the annual defense authorization bill last week, reported Military Times, Defense officials and troops would be barred from communicating with the Foundation or from making “any decision as a result of any claim, objection, or protest made by MRFF without the authority of the Secretary of Defense.”

While the language for the amendment was offered by Republican Rep. Mike Turner, of Ohio, the amendment was adopted with unanimous, bipartisan support in the House Armed Services Committee.

The amendment is designed to simply ensure that military staffers don’t overreact to the group’s demands without following proper protocols. And its bipartisan support shows that it is very reasonable.

But that didn’t stop the group from issuing a profanity-laced tirade.

Confirming its bigoted anti-Christian bias, not to mention lack of professionalism and decorum, the MRFF’s president and founder Mikey Weinstein, angrily lashed out, calling his opponents “bastards” and “enemies.”

More specifically he said, according to Military Times: “If they don’t like what we do at MRFF … they can take a number, pack a picnic lunch and stand in line with the rest of those fundamentalist Christian extremist bastards who constitute our enemies.”

But he didn’t stop digging his anti-Christian hole there. He went on:

If the fundamentalist Christian nationalists who are behind this are trying to execute us through legislation, we’ll take that as validation of the positive effect that we’re having for our clients and for the Constitution.”

“And they can go fuck themselves.”

Well, Mr. Weinstein, we won’t do that, but we will fight him and his group tooth and nail legislatively.

The Senate Armed Services Committee’s draft of the defense authorization bill does not include any similar restrictions on communications or response to MRFF requests, but it should. Expect intense efforts to ensure that they are included in a final bill.

House Republicans will also likely add more amendments on abortion and transgender issues when the bill is debated in the full chamber next month.

If you want to be part of the solution, then contact your Senators and tell them how you feel about far-left extremists pushing a bigoted, anti-Christian agenda on our military.

Religious freedom means our troops are guaranteed the right to express their religion, even on military bases and facilities. And defending that right is a fight worth having.

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

‘Barbie’ Movie Banned in Vietnam as Hollywood Again Kowtows to China

1

ANALYSIS – China’s outrageous claim to almost the entire South China Sea – everything within a “nine-dash line” drawn on Chinese maps – has taken its most recent victim – the movie-viewing public in Vietnam. The Vietnamese government has banned the movie due to a scene with that Chinese-made line on a map.

China takes its illegal claim very seriously and strives to impose its visual representation on maps everywhere, including those appearing in Hollywood movies.

While it’s unclear why the soon-to-be-released film ‘Barbie’ about the iconic doll and her boyfriend Ken would get embroiled in international politics, it has. 

This south China Sea has been a flashpoint between Vietnam and China for years. The artificial line is shown on Chinese maps to mark their claims over the area despite Vietnam, the Philippines, Indonesia, Brunei, Malaysia, and Taiwan claiming parts of the same vast expanse of sea.

Chinese warships and fishing vessels routinely operate in these waters to establish de-facto presence, often provoking clashes with neighboring countries.

The Daily Wire (DW) reported:

“We do not grant license for the American movie ‘Barbie’ to release in Vietnam because it contains the offending image of the nine-dash line,” Vi Kien Thanh, head of the Department of Cinema, a government body in charge of licensing and censoring foreign films, was quoted as saying in the state-run Tuoi Tre newspaper.

The movie’s trailer shows Barbie leaving her perfect doll world and to explore the “real world” after becoming disillusioned with her life.

So why did a big Hollywood studio decide to include this ridiculous claim in their otherwise non-political movies?

All I can think of is – in order to please the communists in Beijing. China is obviously a far bigger market than Vietnam. And who knows if Chinese investors were involved in the movie’s production.

DW notes:

“Barbie” isn’t the first film banned for including the nine-dash line. The Vietnamese government also blocked the DreamWorks animated film “Abominable” (2019) and the action-adventure film “Unchartered” (2022) for the same reason. Netflix removed the Australian spy drama “Pine Gap” in 2021 for their inclusion of the line.

Hollywood blockbusters including the Marvel films “Eternals” and “Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings” have also been in China after directors or actors involved in the films made comments critical of China.

Another big controversy exploded in 2019 over the Tom Cruise movie ‘Top Gun: Maverick.’ Initially the movie appeared to remove the flags of Taiwan and Japan from Maverick’s flight jacket. The flags were part of historical patches representing prior U.S. naval deployments to the region.

As NBC News reported:

In 2019, the trailer for “Top Gun: Maverick” showed Cruise’s character, U.S. Navy pilot Pete Mitchell, in the same bomber jacket he wore in the original film. But two of its flag patches — representing Japan and the Republic of China, the official name for Taiwan — appeared to have been replaced by other emblems.

The move was criticized at the time as an act of self-censorship to please China’s censors. Beijing sees Taiwan, a self-ruling democracy of 24 million people, as an inalienable part of its territory and lashes out at any reference to it as a sovereign nation.  

In this case Hollywood, or Cruise, had a change of heart and reversed their apparent kowtowing to China. CHinese investors also pulled out of the movie.

NBC News continued:

On the film’s release last month after a two-year pandemic delay, both flags had been restored. At an advance screening in Taipei, the audience broke out in cheers and applause at the sight of the Taiwanese flag on the big screen, local news outlet SETN reported.

Sometimes in Hollywood the good guys do win. Sadly, not in the case of Barbie.

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

Heartwarming: Commie Biz Owner Forced To Close Cafe

1

You can’t help but smile when you see this…

Watch Amanda explain the controversy below:

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

Many in Gen Z ‘Love Big Brother,’ Want State Surveillance in Homes

3
Image via Pixabay free images.

ANALYSIS – Be afraid, Be very afraid. 1984 is almost here. A recent poll by the Libertarian CATO Institute showed that a big chunk of our latest and brightest Generation Z (Gen Z or Zoomers) actually favors having the government watch them 24/7.

Including surveillance in their homes and bedrooms.

Zoomers are officially those under the age of 26. And come right after Millennials.

After the horrors of World War Two showcased the brutal dangers of modern totalitarian dictatorships such as Nazi Germany and Communist Soviet Union, George Orwell penned his classic dystopian tale titled ‘Nineteen Eighty-Four’ (1984).

In the novel, written in 1949, the pervasive government of the fictional nation Oceania was known as ‘Big Brother,’ and it watched its citizens incessantly via two-way video devices called ‘telescreens.’ 

This was of course before the advent of television or modern surveillance.

Government agents known as the ‘Thought Police’ were able to monitor everyone at home, at work, on public streets, in shops, even in bathrooms. It was a terrifying existence.

The book and term ‘Big Brother’ have since been widely referenced when warning about government overreach and expanding state control. 

Sadly, it seems that almost 30 percent of Gen Z (and some Millennials) haven’t read the book or understand the danger.

CATO’s Blog notes that

In a newly released Cato Institute 2023 Central Bank Digital Currency National Survey of 2,000 Americans, we asked respondents whether they “favor or oppose the government installing surveillance cameras in every household to reduce domestic violence, abuse, and other illegal activity.”

Fortunately, the poll shows that 75 percent of Americans oppose or are strongly opposed to this insane idea.

However, CATO also notes that the younger you get, the less concerned Americans are about state surveillance and control:

…Americans under the age of 30 stand out when it comes to 1984‐style in‐home government surveillance cameras. 3 in 10 (29 percent) Americans under 30 favor “the government installing surveillance cameras in every household” in order to “reduce domestic violence, abuse, and other illegal activity.” Support declines with age, dropping to 20 percent among 30–44-year-olds and dropping considerably to 6 percent among those over the age of 45.

Support for 24/7 surveillance was especially high among those younger than 30. Almost a third of those born after 1993 said they would welcome round-the-clock monitoring by the government. 

Those respondents in their 40s, 50s, and 60s were almost totally opposed. That is a terribly disturbing trend that bodes ill for liberty in America in the next decades.

In his Boston Globe Email Newsletter, Jeff Jacoby provides his explanation for this sad state among Zoomers:

…perhaps, [it] is that Generation Z has been indoctrinated to regard safety, not freedom, as the highest good — so much so that many would rather be under the nonstop watch of the state than face the possibility of being abused or endangered.

If so, they are in for a fearful awakening. What little protection they might gain from being under the authorities’ constant watch is nothing compared with the peril they would face. Benjamin Franklin’s famous admonition is as relevant as ever: “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” Inviting Big Brother into your home will not keep Gen Z-ers safe. And by the time they realize what they have given up, it will be too late to get it back.

Jacoby adds that the protagonist of Orwell’s novel, Winston Smith, is a weak man who resents the regime — and is ultimately broken for it. And the must-read book’s final words are haunting: “He loved Big Brother.”

Yet, after all we have seen and know about tyranny, almost a third of Generation Z is still prepared to love Big Brother too. Yes, we must be afraid. Very afraid.

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

Amanda Head: Last Poll Results Before GA Senate Run-Off Election!

0

Today is the final day to cast your ballot for Republican Georgia Senate candidate Herschel Walker in the Peach State’s runoff election. Make sure to head to the polls to cast your vote!

Watch Amanda break down the latest Georgia runoff poll results below:

Congressional Committee Accuses Hunter Biden Of Lying Under Oath

1
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)

President Joe Biden’s troubled adult son Hunter Biden lied under oath to Congress, which is a prosecutable crime, congressional Republicans accuse in a new release of documents and evidence.

The U.S. House Ways and Means Committee “voted to release over 100 pages of newly obtained evidence, provided to the Committee by Internal Revenue Service (IRS) whistleblowers Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler, showing Hunter Biden was not truthful during his sworn testimony before Congress on February 28th, 2024,” Committee Republicans announced in a statement.

“In addition to the evidence showing Hunter Biden’s repeated lies under oath before Congress, the Ways and Means Committee voted to release additional documents that affirm the credibility of the IRS whistleblowers’ sworn testimony and evidence previously released by the Committee, as well as more evidence of the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) obstruction of the IRS investigation into Hunter Biden,” the statement reads.

“Hunter Biden has shown once again he believes there are two systems of justice in this country – one for his family, and one for everyone else. Not only did Hunter Biden refuse to comply with his initial subpoena until threatened with criminal contempt, but he then came before Congress and lied,” said Committee Chairman Jason Smith (R-MO.) 

“The Ways and Means Committee’s investigation, and the documents released today, are not part of a personal vendetta against Hunter Biden, but are meant to ensure the equal application of the law,” Smith added.

Smith then noted if Biden lied under oath, he may be criminally prosecuted.

“Lying during sworn testimony is a felony offense that the Department of Justice has prosecuted numerous individuals for in recent years, and the American people expect the same accountability for the son of the President of the United States. Hunter Biden’s lies under oath, and obstruction of a congressional investigation into his family’s potential corruption, calls into question other pieces of his testimony. The newly released evidence affirms, once again, the only witnesses who can be trusted to tell the truth in this investigation are the IRS whistleblowers,” said Smith.

The Committee notes they are releasing:

Complete versions of communications between Hunter Biden and his business associates, thus showing that previously released IRS agent summaries were accurate. You can find the new material here.

Evidence of Assistant U.S. Attorney Leslie Wolf informing IRS investigators’ that they were unable to pursue Kevin Morris as a witness in the Hunter Biden investigation after receiving a classified briefing at CIA headquarters. The new evidence shows that despite requests from investigators to understand the reason why they were unable to pursue Kevin Morris as a witness, DOJ never provided investigators with the requested information.

In a statement, Committee Republicans laid out the alleged lies Biden told while testifying under oath, writing:

The new evidence indisputably shows Hunter Biden lied to Congress in at least three separate instances during his February 28, 2024 transcribed interview: 

Lie # 1: “I sent the text to the wrong Zhao”  

During his deposition, Committee investigators questioned Hunter Biden about the now infamous WhatsApp message he sent to a business associate at the Chinese energy company, CEFC, stating, “I’m sitting here with my father, and we would like to understand why the commitment has not been fulfilled.” In the months that followed, $5 million flowed from CEFC affiliates to companies connected to Hunter and James Biden, the President’s brother.  

Hunter Biden’s Sworn Testimony: “The Zhao that this is sent to is not the Zhao that was connected to CEFC” and he “had no understanding or even remotely knew what the hell I was even Goddamn talking about.” 

The Truth: According to phone records of Hunter Biden’s WhatsApp messages released by the Ways and Means Committee today, the President’s son communicated with only one “Zhao” – Raymond Zhao – in that exchange. Not only did the same Zhao respond, but his message indicates he knew exactly what Hunter Biden was talking about, and that Hunter Biden continued to communicate with the same “Zhao” phone number for an additional three months regarding matters related to CEFC. 

Lie # 2: “Neither of these accounts were under [Hunter Biden’s] control nor affiliated with him”: 

According to Hunter Biden’s business associate, Devon Archer, he and Hunter Biden were equal owners of Rosemont Seneca Bohai, and that entity was used by both individuals. According to evidence provided by the IRS whistleblowers, Hunter Biden was the beneficial owner of the entity’s associated bank account, which was used to receive Hunter’s salary from Burisma and to receive foreign wires, such as funds allegedly transferred from a Kazakhstani individual through an entity that were then used to purchase a Porsche for Hunter Biden. Congressional investigators questioned Hunter Biden during his February 28th deposition regarding his connection to Rosemont Seneca Bohai, as well as bank accounts associated with the entity.

Hunter Biden’s Sworn Testimony: Neither Rosemont Seneca Bohai, nor its associated bank accounts, were “under my control nor affiliated with me” and Hunter, “didn’t even know that there was such a thing” in reference to a corporate secretary of the entity. 

The Truth: Evidence obtained by the Committee and released today from IRS investigator Joseph Ziegler shows otherwise. Not only is there documentation that Hunter Biden was the beneficial owner of a bank account in the name of Rosemont Seneca Bohai,  but the Committee has obtained a signed document where Hunter Biden affirms, “I, Robert Hunter Biden, hereby certify that I am the duly elected, qualified and acting Secretary of Rosemont Seneca Bohai, LLC” in order to enter into a contract on behalf of the entity with Porsche Financial Services.

Lie # 3: “I’d never pick up the phone and call anybody for a visa”: 

During his deposition, Committee investigators questioned Hunter Biden regarding what services he provided to Burisma during his tenure on the board of the Ukrainian company. One of the services that Burisma allegedly needed, was work related to obtaining a U.S. visa for the CEO of Burisma. Congressional investigators questioned Hunter Biden under oath regarding his work for Burisma, and his testimony reveals a potential attempt to conceal he was actively using his name and father’s influence to aid foreign nationals in obtaining visas from the U.S. government. 

Hunter Bidens’ Sworn Testimony: Hunter Biden stated he was unwilling to provide “any work as it related to visas that they needed.” In fact, he stated unequivocally that he’d “never pick up the phone and call anybody for a visa.” 

The Truth: The Committee has obtained and made public today an email communication between Devon Archer, Hunter Biden, and Ukrainian associates in which, in response to concerns about the revocation of Nikolay Zlochevsky’s, the CEO of Burisma, U.S. visa and the resulting limitations on his foreign travel, Archer stated, “Hunter is checking with Miguel Aleman to see if he can provide cover to Kola on the visa.” “Kola” being Nikolay Zlochevsky. Archer also tells Vadim Pozharskyi to “please send Hunter an email with all Kola’s passport and visa documents and evidence and copy me. We’ll take it from there.” These documents show that Hunter Biden did in fact do work on visa issues. 

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk. It is republished with permission from American Liberty News.

Is Biden’s DOJ Out to Get Trump? Or Did Trump Do This to Himself?

3
Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

In an event unprecedented in American history, a former U.S. president, protected by U.S. Secret Service agents, and currently running for president, was booked on federal criminal charges Tuesday by U.S. Marshals at the U.S. federal courthouse in Miami, before being taken to be fingerprinted and processed.

Donald Trump pled ‘not guilty’ to all charges.

The charges relate to Trump taking a lot of highly classified documents from the White House after he left office. And once discovered, he gave multiple bizarre reasons for having them.

According to the indictment, the highly sensitive materials Trump kept included documents about overseas nuclear weapons holdings and various military plans.

But they are really all about the fact that he refused to turn many of them over for upwards of 18 months. And I have criticized Trump for doing that.

So, did Hillary Clinton get treated differently? Of course! And is Joe Biden’s Department of Justice (DOJ) out to get Trump?

Absolutely! That’s a given.

But Trump could still have avoided all this had he behaved differently, before and after he got caught. And that’s important too.

As with Richard Nixon and Watergate, it was about the cover up.

The 37 charges against Trump include violations of the Espionage Act or the willful retention of national security information as well as one count of “conspiracy to obstruct justice,” one count of “withholding a document or record,” one count of “corruptly concealing a document or record,” one count of “concealing a document in a deferral investigation,” one count of “scheme to conceal” and one count of “false statements and representations.”

Based on the evidence represented in the indictment, and from his own words and deeds, it seems that he did do most of the things he is accused of, despite the Team Trump calls that this is only a political prosecution.

I have said before that Trump basically dared the Justice Department to come after him. And I still believe that had Trump simply turned over all the classified materials when they were first requested, this would have likely ended last year without any criminal proceedings.

But Trump didn’t.

The FBI then conducted a very showy surprise raid on the ex-president’s Florida home, Mar-a-Lago, on August 8, 2022. That raid, and the documents recovered there, eventually led to the 37-count indictment that now put Trump where he is.

THE FBI RAID ON MAR-A-LAGO

Many condemned the FBI raid that launched all this as unprecedented and wrong, including me. I argued that it sent a horrible message to the world and looked highly political. (As does the indictment, arrest, and potential trial).

Apparently, the FBI had doubts about the raid as well.

Steven D’Antuono, who left the FBI late last year, explained the FBI-DOJ disagreements over the planning and execution of the Mar-a-Lago search during an interview last week with the House Judiciary Committee.

While he called the back-and-forth between DOJ and the FBI “an everyday discussion,” he noted that it still created “consternation” among the law enforcement officials, reported Politico.

According to the interview transcripts reviewed by Politico, D’Antuono said DOJ wanted the FBI to quickly seize the classified documents from Mar-a-Lago, claiming they could fall into the wrong hands. But the FBI’s Washington Field Office team preferred to seek Trump’s permission, through his attorneys, to search the premises.

The FBI even proposed a plan to surveil Mar-a-Lago in case Trump’s team tried taking any of the disputed papers offsite, according to D’Antuono.

The FBI “had a plan in place to have surveillance around if we needed to,” he said.

“Again, no one was there. So, if they brought in — they – meaning the [former] president’s, you know, people — brought in a big box truck, we would see it, right, and we would have the search warrant in hand and be able to act at that point.”

In the end, DOJ got its way, and they conducted the surprise raid. Fortunately, Trump wasn’t there when it occurred. And that was at least something.

“I didn’t want the spectacle for obvious reasons of why we’re sitting here today. … It’s a reputational risk, right, and that’s the way I looked at it from the Bureau,” reported Politico.

Unfortunately, the FBI has still suffered a great deal of reputational risk, as has the DOJ under Biden. This all stinks as political.

But Trump has played a big part in all this as well.

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

New Poll Exposes Democrats’ True Thoughts About Biden

1
Joe Biden via Gage Skidmore Flickr

There’s a wealth of new polling data on the Democratic presidential nomination contest, with polls from The Wall Street Journal and Associated Press both finding that even Democratic voters are concerned that President Joe Biden is too old to run.

The AP/NORC poll of adults (not registered voters) found that 77 percent of respondents believed Biden was too old to serve another term.

And for the hardened Team Blue partisans who shout “ageism!” at such findings…69 percent of self-identified Democrats said Biden’s age is a big issue (among Republicans, it was a whopping 89 percent – which shouldn’t come as a surprise).

But this must be a fluke, an outlier, and a one-off. Surely, the age issue can’t be that big a deal for Mr. Biden. Except The Wall Street Journal poll confirmed it is.

The Journal asked a split question – one if voters think Biden’s mental fitness is sufficient for the job, the other specifically on whether he is “too old.”

On the mental ability, 60 percent questioned Biden’s mental ability. On age, a total of 73 percent said he is “too old.”

What are the comparable numbers for former President Donald Trump?

A 49-46 split says Trump isn’t mentally up for the job. On age, another spilt, with 47 percent saying he’s too old and 45 saying he isn’t.

As always with polls, the numbers are snapshots in time and subject to change.

What these data points do, though, is reinforce narratives that have long been whispered in Democratic circles: Biden’s time has passed, and he would be wise to bow out and allow someone else to take the fight to what looks like Donald Trump in 2024.

But such whispers against an incumbent are very hard to translate into hard reality. What could bring them a tad bit closer to the fore are the other items in the Journal poll, particularly the sense that most people think the economy has hit a rough patch, and they are feeling the effects:

…58% of voters say the economy has gotten worse over the past two years, whereas only 28% say it has gotten better, and nearly three in four say inflation is headed in the wrong direction. Those views were echoed in the survey by large majorities of independents, a group that helped deliver Biden’s victory over Trump in the 2020 presidential race. Voters were almost evenly split on the direction of the job market.

It’s not a wipeout for Biden, but the data are hardly comforting to an incumbent who has staked his presidency on a massive reworking of the economy, with government intervention and support leading the way. Team Blue partisans will say it’s early, these things take time, etc., etc. And they aren’t entirely wrong.

But there’s also the iron law of politics to contend with: if you’re explaining, you’re losing. And until the data show voters are feeling better about their own particular economic situation, then Mr. Biden will need more than a slogan – “Bidenomics” – and promises of widespread prosperity to save his own political future.

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

Top Democrat Senate Recruit in Free-fall After Being Caught Using Racist Slur

1
Ted Eytan from Washington, DC, USA, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

A top Democrat recruit for United States Senate has fallen behind his Republican opponent and is backing out of a Democrat debate after he used a racist slur in a congressional hearing.

A planned April 23 debate between two Maryland Democrat candidates, Congressman David Trone and Prince George’s County Executive Angela Alsobrooks, was canceled after Trone “refused to commit” in the wake of the incident.

During a March 21 House Budget Committee hearing, Trone asked  about tax policy with Shalanda Young, who is both White House Director of the Office of Budget and Management, and black, “So this Republican j-gaboo that, it’s the tax rate that’s stopping business investment, it’s just completely faulty by people who have never run a business.”

Trone says he meant to say “bugaboo,” but instead used a racial slur for black people when speaking to the black official.

The incident could derail Trone, who is leading Alsobrooks in polls ahead of the May 21 primary to see who will succeed retiring three-term Democrat Senator Ben Cardin as the Democrat nominee.  Not only is Trone white and Alsobrooks black, in a state whose Democrat primary sees large black turnout.

Trone, a millionaire businessman, has flooded TV with ads featuring black women supporting him. 

Trone is still considered the favorite to win the Democrat nomination in the heavily Democrat state.

But Trone’s expected easy win to claim the seat in November was upended when popular Republican former governor Larry Hogan jumped into the race.

Hogan leads Trone by an average of 4.4% in polls of a hypothetical November matchup.

Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk. Article Published With The Permission of American Liberty News.

Amanda Head: Top LA Lawyer Warns Of Hollywood’s Future

1
Austin Green, CC BY-SA 4.0 via Wikimedia Commons

Will the Screen Actor’s Guild writing stroke be the beginning of the end of Hollywood as we know it?

Watch Amanda explain the situation below:

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