If you’re in search of a New Years resolution let it be to stop inadvertently supporting the left’s wild attacks on the family.
It’s time to fight back and this is one easy step you can take to dismantle the radical left.
Watch Amanda break down the latest controversy below.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – As a former Marine Corps officer and military attaché who served at several embassies overseas in the 1990s, it has infuriated me to see partisans and ideologues impose their radical agendas on our foreign embassies during Joe Biden’s tenure at the White House.
Flying extremely divisive, and to many host countries, offensive, flags representing controversial sexual agendas (LGBTQ+), which includes the extreme ‘trans’ movement, and private groups which espouse hate toward one race and law enforcement (Black Lives Matter – BLM), has been an egregious abuse pushed hard by the Biden State Department since last year.
Our embassies and consulates are official extensions of the United States. They are even considered sovereign U.S. territory.
They are there on behalf of the entire U.S. nation, as represented by our national flag, not sectarian views, or radical and controversial agendas.
This is true, even when these same radical agendas are being forced on our executive branches of government.
Thankfully, the new GOP House is proposing to quickly change that abuse.
The Old Glory Only Act, introduced Monday by South Carolina Republican Rep. Jeff Duncan would prohibit any flag other than the American flag to be flown over U.S. embassies and consulates.
Newsmax reported:
“Our beautiful flag, Old Glory, should be the only flag flying and representing our country over our diplomatic and consular posts worldwide,” Duncan said in a press release announcing the bill’s introduction in the House Monday. “The American flag is a beacon of liberty, and no other flag or symbol better portrays our shared values than the Stars and Stripes. It is important to ensure that Old Glory only is flown at American embassies to represent our ideals abroad.”
The New York Times previously reported that Biden Secretary of State Antony Blinken authorized U.S. embassies to fly ‘gay pride’ flags in April 2021, prior to May 17, which is the International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia, and to continue displaying the flag through the end of the month.
The push to fly the rainbow ‘gay pride’ flag actually began in 2014, under the Obama-Biden term. That flag has flown over U.S. embassies in more than a dozen countries since then, including Russia, Spain, Sweden and South Korea.
President Trump’s Secretary of State banned the ‘pride’ flags from being flown but his order was quickly reversed by Blinken.
In May, another cable from Blinken’s State Department authorized flying Black Lives Matter flags at U.S. diplomatic facilities worldwide, Foreign Policy reported at the time.
The BLM flag has been flown at U.S. embassies in Brazil, Greece, Spain, Bosnia, Cambodia and South Korea, according to Duncan’s office.
This, even though violent BLM rioters had spent months attacking the federal courthouse in Portland and laying siege to dozens of cities nationwide just months earlier in 2020.
The BLM riots caused over $2 billion in property damage, more than any other similar event in U.S. history, injured over 2,000 local and federal police officers, and resulted in numerous deaths of civilians.
According to the NYT, a cable from the State Department at the time gave the chiefs of missions (COMs), who lead our overseas diplomatic stations, a “blanket written authorization” to display the flags if it was “appropriate in light of local conditions.”
While the Times noted this was an “authorization, not a requirement,” few COMs will ignore the pressure to follow the boss’ lead, and the more woke embassies and consulates quickly started flying these unofficial flags.
Republicans are optimistic the new GOP leadership will hold a vote on the bill since there is broad GOP support for the idea.
But why stop there? Why not ban these divisive flags from being flown over any federal buildings, period – including all of the ones here at home?
According to the General Services Administration (GSA), More than 40 federal buildings across the country opted to raise the Pride Flag to show their support of “diversity, equity, and inclusion” in the federal workforce.
What they are actually doing is flying the flags of exclusive, divisive and radical private groups on federal property paid for by the U.S. taxpayer.
This too must end.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – Maybe the realistic threat of the U.S. taking some sort of limited military action against the Mexican drug cartels is having an effect on Mexico’s socialist president, Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO).
Because Joe Biden’s administration is certainly not the reason — more likely though, this is just wishful thinking and AMLO, as the president is better known, is just pretending to play nice.
Still, AMLO now appears to be quietly meeting with American lawmakers on security and drug policy.
This, after several prominent GOP lawmakers recently called for the authority to use military force against the drug cartels, as part of the broader battle to protect our borders.
A massive wave of illegal Fentanyl is today killing thousands of young Americans each month (over 100,000 in a year) thanks to the Mexican drug cartels which control parts of the border.
The deadly drug is made in Mexico with precursor chemicals shipped from China.
These cartels along the border also recently kidnapped and murdered several Americans who legally crossed the border into Mexico. Others have disappeared. (RELATED: Mexican Drug Cartels Worried About GOP Calls To Use American Military Against Them)
Earlier AMLO delivered insulting lectures blaming the U.S. for the fentanyl overdose crisis because American families don’t hug their kids enough. (RELATED: Mexican President Says Mexico Is Safer Than US, But Murder Rate Is 4x Higher)
And this week, AMLO sent his foreign minister, Marcelo Ebrard, to Washington, D.C., to mobilize Mexico’s 52 consulates, the most foreign consulates in the U.S., to launch a nationwide information campaign “in defense of our country,” he said, following “unacceptable attacks” by GOP legislators.
In what I called foreign election interference, AMLO also called on Mexican Americans and U.S. Hispanics to vote against Republicans.
But now a bipartisan delegation of U.S. lawmakers met with AMLO over the weekend.
Six Republicans and five Democrats met with the Mexican president.
And they report he told them he would work with China to stop their shipments of fentanyl precursors that are brought into Mexico and processed before being smuggled into the United States.
According to their press release, Senator John Cornyn, R-Texas, a member of the Senate Finance, Intelligence, and Judiciary Committees, led the congressional delegation (CODEL) which returned to the U.S. Monday afternoon.
This month, Cornyn visited the U.S.-Mexican border and called on Joe Biden to enforce existing U.S. immigration laws.
In addition to their meeting with AMLO, the group also met with intelligence, drug enforcement and government officials in Mexico.
Senators Chris Coons, D-Del., Jerry Moran, R-Kan., Chris Murphy, D-Conn., Mike Lee, R-Utah, Kyrsten Sinema, I-Ariz., Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., and Peter Welch, D-Vt., along with Representatives Tony Gonzales (TX-23), Henry Cuellar (TX-28), Veronica Escobar (TX-16) and Maria Salazar (FL-27) rounded out the rest of the delegation.
Their press release stated that they received:
…briefings from U.S. intelligence officials, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, and U.S. Ambassador to Mexico Ken Salazar on the United States’ security posture with regards to Mexico, recent killings of Americans in the country, efforts to stop drug trafficking, and illegal immigration at the U.S.-Mexico border. The delegation shared their concerns with Mexico’s handling of these issues with President López Obrador and members of his administration.
“One of the interesting parts is he agreed to meet with China on how they could prevent getting some of the raw materials, the precursors, from China,” Rep. Tony Gonzales, R-Texas, told The Hill.
“So that in itself acknowledges the fact that China is sending these things through, mainly through Manzanillo and some of the ports on that side of Mexico.”
However, the threats of U.S. military action from GOP lawmakers have also helped AMLO whip the country into a nationalistic frenzy. And I trust his actions more than his words.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation is in possession of a document in which a Bureau source details a scheme to bribe then-Vice-President Joe Biden in exchange for policy decisions – but the agency is refusing to turn it over to congressional investigators.
House Committee on Oversight and Accountability Chairman James Comer (R-KY), working with and Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Chuck Grassley (R-IA), has subpoenaed the FBI to produce the unclassified record alleging a criminal scheme involving Biden and a foreign national.
“The document, an FBI-generated FD-1023 form, allegedly details an arrangement involving an exchange of money for policy decisions,” Comer’s office reports. An FD-1023 form records the details of an interview with a source.
Comer subpoenaed the record on May 3, 2023 with a return date of May 10, 2023.
The FBI has defied the subpoena, at a time when polls show a majority of Americans now view the FBI as steeped in partisan bias and working to defend Biden politically.
“It’s clear from the FBI’s response that the unclassified record the Oversight Committee subpoenaed exists, but they are refusing to provide it to the Committee,” said Comer in a statement.
“The FBI’s delay in producing a single, unclassified record is unacceptable,” said Comer. “The information provided by a whistleblower raises concerns that then-Vice President Biden allegedly engaged in a bribery scheme with a foreign national. The FBI must provide this record to Congress without further delay. The American people demand the truth and accountability for any wrongdoing. That starts with getting this record.”
“We’ve asked the FBI to not only provide this record, but to also inform us what it did to investigate these allegations. The FBI has failed to do both. The FBI’s position is ‘trust, but you aren’t allowed to verify.’ That is unacceptable,” Comer added.
“The FBI’s well-documented failures in politically sensitive investigations have eroded public confidence over the past few years. Just a few days ago, the Durham Report found that the FBI relied on unverified and inaccurate information as the foundation of its debunked Russia collusion probe. The FBI needs to take steps to restore public confidence. Flouting a legitimate congressional subpoena and dodging oversight is no way to rebuild the public trust. The FBI’s credibility is on the line, and their continued failure to cooperate will have long lasting consequences,” said Grassley.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
A top legal watchdog is going to federal court to uncover documents on a major breach of President Donald Trump’s security.
The non-profit public interest law firm Judicial Watch announced in a statement that “it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for records related to an August 31, 2025, incident in which a club member allegedly carried a loaded semi-automatic handgun past Secret Service screening checkpoints at Trump National Golf Club in Virginia while President Donald Trump was on site.”
“It’s very disturbing that a security lapse of this magnitude could occur, particularly given recent threats against the president,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The public has a right to know how this happened and what is being done to prevent it from happening again.”
“According to reports, a club member was able to bring a loaded semi-automatic handgun onto the premises while Trump was present, after passing through Secret Service screening checkpoints. A Secret Service spokesperson said that handheld magnetometers were used instead of walkthrough devices when screening guests at the president’s golf resort, located about 25 miles northwest of the White House,” Judicial Watch reports.
“The agent in charge of searching the guest’s bag at the Sterling golf facility was placed on administrative leave amid an ongoing review by the Secret Service,” Judicial Watch notes.
Judicial Watch reports it “filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the U.S. Secret Service (USSS) failed to respond to a November 18, 2025, FOIA request for:”
All records related to the internal investigation of the August 31, 2025, incident at the Trump National Golf Club in Sterling, Virginia, in which a club member was able to get a semi-automatic hand gun into the club premises while the President was present without initial detection, including but not limited to investigative reports, agents’ notes, witness interview, audio-video recordings and other records.
All emails and text messages sent between members of the Presidential protective detail regarding the August 31, 2025, incident at the golf club.
“Trump has survived multiple assassination attempts, including Butler, Pennsylvania Rally – July 13, 2024; West Palm Beach, Florida – September 15, 2024; and most recently at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, Washington, D.C. – April 25, 2026,” Judicial Watch points out.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk.
Democrats didn’t expect it to be this bad…
Weeks after Joe Biden announced his re-election campaign and pollsters are already showing massive red flags.]
Watch Amanda explain the situation below:
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – Will Kellyanne Conway return to Team Trump? As Kamala Harris, who recently stole the campaign from her boss, Joe Biden, basks in her current sugar high glory, some in the Trump campaign are wondering if his team needs a reboot.
Or maybe an injection of a 2016 winner.
And who better to revitalize Trump’s campaign, than his winning campaign manager from 2016, Kellyanne Conway.
At least Donald Trump’s wife, Melania, reportedly thinks so.
And a recent post on X showing pics of Conway and Trump together in New Jersey has fueled the speculation that a return to the campaign is in the works.
In 2016 the brash flaxen haired pollster-turned campaign chief swooped in after the campaign’s failing start with its B Team and is rightly credited as helping to get Trump across the finish line to victory against Hillary Clinton.
According to the Daily Beast:
Donald Trump is looking to bring in Kellyanne Conway to shake up his faltering campaign, according to a new report.
The outspoken adviser is seen as a trusted confidante by both the former president and, importantly, by Melania Trump who is “pushing” for Conway to return because she sees her as “a familiar face amid a sea of relative newcomers,” says Tara Palmeri in the online magazine, Puck.
Lara Trump, co-chair of the Republican National Committee and wife of Trump’s son, Eric, is also said to be pushing for Conway to be brought on board to reignite campaign stalwarts taken by surprise by Kamala Harris’ fast start after Joe Biden’s sudden departure.
One adviser told Puck that Trump listens to powerful women, more than men. “He listens to Hope Hicks. He listens to Brooke Rollins,” they tell Puck. “Ironically, he likes powerful women. If you’re a sharp woman, he will listen to you. Hope and these people could tell him the hardest shit. He may not have done anything, but at least he listens.”
While she was a key player in Trump’s 2016 win, eight years ago, she could still be the spark that relights the fire of a campaign still unsteady after Harris’ surprising Democrat Party coup and subsequent rise.
Puck notes:
…it may also be fair to question whether his brain trust is living in the past. Chris LaCivita, who famously ran the Swift Boat Veterans campaign against John Kerry, has spearheaded an attack on Walz’s military record, but it’s yet to have the same impact as it did in 2004, when the U.S. had recently invaded Iraq. Other Trump allies are wondering if pollster Tony Fabrizio is likewise frozen in carbonite, as he considers a race-baiting strategy against Harris akin to the Willie Horton ads against Dukakis back in 1988.
Team Harris has raised $310 million in July, and another $36 million in the 24 hours after announcing her stolen Valor radical VP choice, Tim Walz.
So far Team Trump hasn’t been able to land any significant blows on his younger female political opponent.
According to Puck, Trump’s campaign team is split in half over whether she should return in a similar role to the one she had in 2016.
Meanwhile, Conway is smoothing over any ruffled feather with JD Vance after openly suggesting Marco Rubio as Trump’s VP.
As part of her mending relations effort, Conway recently tweeted “Brilliant” to Vance’s stunt when he landed at the same airport as Harris and Walz and challenged her to debate.
One big potential drawback to Team Trump is the fact that Conway recently registered as a $50,000- a month foreign agent for a Ukrainian oligarch.
This is already provoking accusations among her critics that it would be a conflict of interest. However, a campaign manager or advisor is not the same as a member of the administration. So, that issue may not matter much in these final three months of the campaign.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk.
Popular shoe brand Crocs is siding with the woke gender mob…
Watch Amanda fill you in on the latest controversy:
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ALERT – In what appears to be an idiotic attempt to supposedly kill Joe Biden, a 19-year-old man repeatedly rammed a U-Haul truck into the barriers around the White House at Lafayette Park on Monday night.
To be clear these barriers (or bollards) are designed to stop large vehicles and are a substantial distance from the White House perimeter fence.
There was no mention of explosives or other dangerous materials aboard the truck. Had there been this would be an entirely different story.
Still, the incident prompted the evacuation at The Hay-Adams Hotel on the 800 block of 16th Street.
The driver, Sai Varshith Kandula of Chesterfield, Missouri has reportedly been arrested and charged with multiple crimes, including threatening to kill, kidnap, or inflict harm on the president, vice president or family member.
He was also charged with assault with a dangerous weapon and reckless operation of a motor vehicle.
A man who said he was walking home from his run on the mall videotaped a driver in a U-Haul truck repeatedly ram the barricade at Lafayette Park near the White House.
“I decided it was time to get the hell out of there” he says
See the video below.
According to a United States Park Police statement, the driver “intentionally crashed into the bollards on the outside of Lafayette Park.”
Ya, that looks about right.
The Secret Service spokesman also tweeted:
Shortly before 10:00 p.m. Monday, Secret Service Uniformed Division officers detained the driver of a box truck after the vehicle collided with security barriers on the north side of Lafayette Square on 16th Street. There were no injuries to any Secret Service or White House personnel and the cause and manner of the crash remain under investigation.
Seems to me that the cause and manner of the crash are pretty obvious – the guy kept trying to ram through the barricades.
In a follow-up tweet, the spokesman said: “Charges will be filed by the United States Park Police with investigative support from the #SecretService.”
In the photo below the truck can be seen more clearly after the driver was secured and removed. The bollards can also be more clearly seen.
Meanwhile, is that a swastika flag on the pavement at the police officer’s feet?
The location of the crash is noteworthy since it lies at the south end of 16th St where it is now known as Black Lives Matter (BLM) square. Fox 5 reported:
Had the barriers been breached, two fences providing additional layers of security would have been in-between the driver and the White House. Lafayette Square has long been one of the nation’s most prominent venues for demonstration near the Executive Mansion. The park was closed for nearly a year after federal authorities fenced off the area at the height of nationwide protests over policing following the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, but it reopened in May 2021.
What the news outlet doesn’t say is that during those violent BLM riots at Lafayette Park in 2020 numerous officers were injured, cars and property burned, and the thin blue line of police at the park between the rioters and White House fence were almost overrun.
During the height of the rioting on May 31st, President Trump was also briefly rushed to the underground bunker by the Secret Service.
These barriers are designed to stop vehicles, not mobs of angry rioters.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
The Legal Hit Squad Targeting Trump Lawyers
Without a whisper, David Brock once again took his seat in that deep club chair, the one upholstered in battered oxblood leather and steeped in quiet menace. He reached for his tailor-crafted inner pocket, drawing from it a fresh Davidoff 702 Double R. The oily Ecuadorian leaf caught flame with practiced ease, releasing those same familiar notes of dark chocolate and café crema. Nearby, a Baccarat tumbler appeared in a silent ritual of service, filled just so with Pappy Van Winkle, as though it had always been there. This wasn’t just habit. It was stagecraft, and the man in the chair was directing a performance with constitutional consequences.
There was no need for preamble. Those in the room knew why they were there. Brock was about to reintroduce the legal profession to its own velvet-clad nightmare. His audience, a quiet circle of left-wing patrons and media barons, leaned in as he explained the next phase of his campaign, not against Donald Trump per se, but against anyone daring to offer him or his allies a legal defense. This wasn’t about winning court cases. This was about ensuring those cases were never filed at all.
The 65 Project, Brock explained, was not an electoral effort. It was not a messaging campaign. It was war. A war against the 6th Amendment, that slender but essential clause guaranteeing every American the right to legal counsel. Its aim? To deprive Republicans, particularly those challenging elections or government orthodoxy, of any capable legal defense.
Run through Brock’s network of nonprofits and housed under Law Works, the 65 Project deployed seasoned political operatives to file bar complaints, ethics charges, and sanctions motions against Trump-affiliated attorneys. The power of the model lay in its asymmetry. A single complaint, even meritless, could cost an attorney tens of thousands of dollars and a year or more in disciplinary review. And even if dismissed, the stain was permanent.
In 2025, this campaign has not slowed. In February, the 65 Project filed a high-profile complaint against Edward Martin, then the interim US Attorney for the District of Columbia. His offense? Alleged conflicts of interest tied to representing January 6 defendants before his federal appointment. The complaint cited violations of Rule 4-1.7 of professional conduct, a detail blasted across the headlines of friendly media outlets. As of June, there is no word on whether the complaint succeeded, but that isn’t the point. The accusation is the punishment.
Incredibly, the 65 Project also targeted the sitting Attorney General of the United States, Pam Bondi. On June 5, 2025, a coalition including the 65 Project, Democracy Defenders Fund, Lawyers Defending American Democracy, and Lawyers for the Rule of Law filed a 23-page ethics complaint with the Florida Bar, accusing Bondi of “serious professional misconduct.” The complaint alleged that Bondi threatened DOJ lawyers with discipline or termination for failing to pursue President Trump’s political objectives, particularly via a February 5 “zealous advocacy” memo. It claimed her actions led to resignations and firings in violation of DOJ norms and Florida Bar rules. Yet, on June 6, the Florida Bar summarily rejected the complaint, citing a policy against investigating sitting officers appointed under the US Constitution. It was the third such complaint against Bondi, and the third rejection. Critics like DOJ Chief of Staff Chad Mizelle called the filings “vexatious” and politically motivated. That the 65 Project would go after a sitting Attorney General at all illustrates the sheer audacity, and absurdity, of their campaign. They have announced they will be filing more complaints against Bondi.
Even more outrageous, the same coalition named two additional Trump administration officials in their June 5 complaint: Emil Bove, Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General and Todd Blanche, Deputy Attorney General. The complaint accused them contributing to a culture of unethical conduct within the Justice Department by pressuring career lawyers to ignore professional responsibilities and instead pursue political objectives at the behest of President Trump. The goal was clear: not just to intimidate one leader, but to undermine the credibility of an entire legal team working within the bounds of the law.
This complaint, like so many others, underscores the project’s enduring mission: to ensure lawyers think twice before defending Trump or any of his associates. Public defenders and private litigators alike have been swept into the net. Whether you were in court for Giuliani, or simply filed an amicus brief on election integrity, the 65 Project likely has your name on a list.
This strategy, weaponizing legal ethics as a partisan bludgeon, would have made Boss Tweed grin from ear to ear. Backroom operators like Col. George Brinton McClellan Harvey would recognize it instantly. Harvey, managing editor of the Democratic Party’s press empire at the turn of the 20th century, orchestrated conventions from smoke-filled rooms in Chicago’s Blackstone Hotel, where policies were written not in law books, but on cocktail napkins between puffs of Havana cigars. Brock, in many ways, is his spiritual heir, using legal bureaucracy the way Harvey used ink and influence.
The Biden-appointed judiciary has not resisted. In Michigan, Democratic activists succeeded in convincing a federal judge to sanction every lawyer who filed election-related litigation for Trump in 2020. Among them: Lin Wood, Sidney Powell, and Stefanie Junttila. Each was ordered to pay legal fees to Democratic Party groups and attend re-education courses, under the euphemism of continuing legal education. The court referred them for possible disbarment, fulfilling Brock’s vision.
Michael Teter, managing director of the 65 Project, has filed complaints against more than 100 attorneys across 26 states. The targets include high-profile figures like Jenna Ellis, John Eastman, and Cleta Mitchell. And while many of these complaints were dismissed by mid-2023, the damage to reputations and client relationships lingers.
The project’s tactics have drawn sharp rebuke. Congressman Lance Gooden, in April 2025, called the 65 Project a “political hit squad” and demanded a Justice Department investigation. Others on social media have accused the group of colluding with establishment Republicans to kneecap Trump’s legal allies. Yet Brock’s defenders frame the group as guardians of democracy, protecting the legal profession from ethical collapse.
Such framing is dishonest. When Alan Dershowitz defended Al Gore in 2000, no one suggested he should be disbarred for challenging election results. But now, lawyers challenging questionable election conduct on behalf of Republicans face professional ruin. This is not accountability. It is ideological warfare.
Critics may point out that the 65 Project has not secured many disbarments. That may be true, but they have achieved some high-profile penalties. Jenna Ellis was publicly censured by a Colorado judge in March 2023. Rudy Giuliani had his law license suspended in New York and is facing permanent disbarment proceedings in Washington, DC. John Eastman was disbarred in California following a March 27, 2024, decision by State Bar Court Judge Yvette Roland, who found him culpable of 10 out of 11 disciplinary charges related to his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. His license was placed on involuntary inactive status days later, rendering him ineligible to practice law in California. Eastman has appealed, but as of June 15, 2025, no reversal has been reported. He was also suspended from practicing law in Washington, DC, on May 3, 2024, pending resolution of the California case. Lin Wood surrendered his law license in Georgia under pressure from multiple complaints. These results are rare but not insignificant. Still, the goal was never just disbarment. It was deterrence. It was a public display of consequence, a digital scarlet letter. No need to win in court when you can win in LinkedIn’s HR department.
The project has inspired imitators including the Democracy Defenders Fund, Lawyers Defending American Democracy, and Lawyers for the Rule of Law. The Lincoln Project also targets law firms, encouraging junior associates to pressure partners against accepting GOP clients. Shutdown DC and the Un-American Bar maintain lists of “insurrectionist” lawyers. Others push the American Bar Association to adopt rules banning election challenges altogether, cloaking censorship in the rhetoric of professionalism.
Marc Elias, the left’s court general, has taken the mission even further, seeking to disqualify GOP candidates under the 14th Amendment, resurrecting post-Civil War measures to bar Trump allies from holding office. Lawsuits against Paul Gosar, Andy Biggs, and others reflect this broader ecosystem of lawfare. It is a constellation of coordinated attacks designed to render conservative legal advocacy untenable.
And what of the Constitution? The Sixth Amendment was never meant to be partisan. It exists not to protect the powerful, but the accused. In America, even pariahs have lawyers. Even the guilty deserve defense. The 65 Project’s perverse genius is to flip that premise, treating legal representation as complicity, and enforcing political loyalty through professional terror.
David Brock did not build this machinery alone. Melissa Moss, a Clinton veteran, helped architect the effort. She recruited Democratic grandees, Tom Daschle, ABA presidents, former state judges, to lend legitimacy. Their goal? To make conservative legal advocacy professionally radioactive.
And it may be working. Some lawyers are declining GOP clients outright. Others fear disciplinary complaints, X mobs, or worse. The chilling effect is real, and precisely what the architects intended. The War on the Sixth is a war on courage, a war on professional independence, a war on the idea that justice should be blind.
In the end, Brock’s smoke-filled rooms are not about cigars or cocktails. They are about control. They are about ensuring that when Republicans step into a courtroom, they do so alone.
If you enjoy my work, please consider subscribing: https://x.com/amuse.