Opinion

Home Opinion Page 39

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.

Biden Trades Russian Arms Dealer for Woke Female Basketball Player – Leaves Male US Marine to Rot

10

ANALYSIS – Can’t say this was unexpected. Joe Biden just traded a convicted Russian arms dealer for a guilty woke basketball player, while leaving an innocent former U.S. Marine to rot in Russian jail. 

And to make matters worse, Brittney Griner, who pled guilty to having cannabis vape oil in her luggage, was only in Russian jail for a few months while Paul Whelan, who was set-up and falsely convicted of espionage, has been imprisoned in a Russian labor camp for nearly four years.

Whelan, 52, remains there where he is to continue serving out a 16-year sentence.

Russian arms trafficker Viktor Bout had been serving time in a U.S. federal prison since 2011. 

It is clear Biden is playing favorites.

Biden called Griner’s wife earlier this year to assure her of his commitment to securing her release. But no similar call was made to the Whelan family, despite multiple requests from Elizabeth Whelan for a meeting with the president. 

After news reports about the snub emerged, Biden finally called Elizabeth Whelan in early July.  

Of course, from day one, the liberal media has been constantly bombarding us with Griner’s sob story in her Russian jail, keeping her issue front and center for maximum PR leverage, while leaving Whelan on the back burner, if at all.

While we read every minor detail of Griner’s travails, and she was allowed regular access to the outside world, Whelan was held in a cell at the notorious Stalin-era Lefortovo Prison for over a year, where initially he was denied things like toilet paper and soap, and guards threatened, abused and harassed him.

Whelan also wasn’t allowed to make calls to his parents, his mail was censored, and visits from his lawyers and embassy representatives were extremely limited.

Recall that Griner, who is a black lesbian, also refused to stand for the national anthem.

To the left she checks all the super woke boxes.

Meanwhile, Biden blamed Russia for his failure to include Whelan in the trade.

“We’ve not forgotten about Paul Whelan,” Biden said Thursday morning. “This was not a choice about which American to bring home. … Sadly, for totally illegitimate reasons, Russia is treating Paul’s case differently than Brittney’s. … We will never give up.”

Well, that’s patently false. 

It doesn’t matter what the Russians say or want. It’s Biden’s job to make things happen. It should have been both released for Bout, or no deal. 

Especially when one who is young and healthy, and had been arrested for drugs, had only been in jail for a few months, and the other one who was falsely accused, is over 50 and been in a labor camp for 4 years.

However, being gracious, and perhaps in a bid to not alienate Biden, Whelan’s twin brother David Whelan, said Thursday:

I am so glad that Brittney Griner is on her way home. As the family member of a Russian hostage, I can literally only imagine the joy she will have, being reunited with her loved ones, and in time for the holidays. There is no greater success than for a wrongful detainee to be freed and for them to go home. The Biden administration made the right decision to bring Ms. Griner home, and to make the deal that was possible, rather than waiting for one that wasn’t going to happen.

But as the Detroit Free Press reports, this wasn’t the message the Whelan’s were sending a few months ago when the U.S. negotiated the release of Trevor Reed, another American wrongfully detained in Russia, in exchange for Russian drug trafficker Konstantin Yaroshenko

At the time, Whelan’s brother David asked: “Is President (Joe) Biden’s failure to bring Paul home an admission that some cases are too hard to solve? Is the administration’s piecemeal approach picking low-hanging fruit? And how does a family know that their loved one’s case is too difficult, a hostage too far out of reach?”

That last message is the more correct one. Biden clearly favored Griner to please his leftist base, while abandoning Whelan, a former U.S. Marine, to rot in A Russian jail. GAND

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

Pope Francis Appoints Vocal Trump Critic As DC Archbishop In Provocative Leadership Move

3

Pope Francis has named Cardinal Robert McElroy, a known advocate for migrants and outspoken critic of President-elect Donald Trump, as the new Archbishop of Washington, D.C. The decision underscores the pontiff’s preference for church leaders who align with his progressive vision, even as it risks further deepening ideological divisions within the millennia-old Catholic Church.

Cardinal McElroy, recognized as a strong supporter of LGBTQ inclusion and other liberal causes, has consistently aligned with Pope Francis on key social and theological issues. His appointment was announced two weeks before Inauguration Day, conspicuous timing that drew widespread attention given the cardinal’s history of publicly criticizing Trump’s policies on immigration and social justice. This is particularly notable in light of McElroy’s emphasis on synodality (dialogue with one another in the presence of the Spirit of God) and church reform, which have drawn both praise and criticism from Catholic observers.

The White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

As Forbes’ Conor Murray reports, the move to elevate McElroy comes as a stark contrast to Trump’s nomination of Brian Burch as ambassador to Vatican City. Burch, a conservative Catholic activist and president of the right-leaning advocacy group CatholicVote, was instrumental in rallying Catholic support for Trump during the 2024 campaign. His organization has frequently clashed with the more progressive stances of Pope Francis and his allies:

McElroy has largely slammed Trump because of his views on immigration, including his promise to conduct mass deportations. McElroy was one of 12 Catholic bishops from California who co-authored a statement last month voicing support for “our migrant brothers and sisters,” acknowledging the “calls for mass deportations and raids on undocumented individuals” have created fear in migrant communities. After Trump’s first election victory in 2016, McElroy called it “unthinkable” that Catholics would “stand by while more than ten percent of our flock is ripped from our midst and deported.” He called Trump’s mass deportation plan an “act of injustice which would stain our national honor” and compared it to Japanese interment and Native American dispossession. McElroy criticized Trump’s plan to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy in 2017 for lacking any “shred of humanity,” stating Jesus Christ was “both a refugee and an immigrant during his journey.”

In a 2023 column for America magazine, McElroy urged greater welcoming of divorced and LGBTQ Catholics into the church, stating the church’s “disproportionate” focus on sexual activity as sin “does not lie at the heart” of a Christian’s relationship with God and “should change.” McElroy called it a “demonic mystery of the human soul why so many men and women have a profound and visceral animus toward members of the L.G.B.T. communities.” In a February 2024 speech, McElroy considered the lack of support among Catholics for blessing same-sex marriages to be the result of “enduring animus among far too many toward LGBT persons.” McElroy has also criticized abortion being considered a “de facto litmus test for determining whether a Catholic public official is a faithful Catholic.” McElroy, however, called Biden’s lack of support for anti-abortion legislation an “immense sadness” in a 2021 America magazine column, and called the overturning of Roe v. Wade a “day to give thanks and celebrate.”

Burch, founder and co-president of CatholicVote, was once a Trump skeptic but praised him in 2020 for making a “concerted effort to reach out to Catholics in a way that we haven’t seen in the past.” That year, he authored the pro-Trump book, “A New Catholic Moment: Donald Trump and the Politics of the Common Good.” Burch has slammed Francis for “progressive Catholic cheerleading” and accused him of creating “massive confusion” over his approval of blessing same-sex marriages in 2023.

Also on Monday, Francis appointed Sister Simona Brambilla, an Italian nun, to lead a Vatican office, making her the first woman to lead a major Vatican department. The department, the Dicastery for the Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, is responsible for religious orders. Francis has long voiced support for greater roles for women in the church, though he has ruled out ordaining women as deacons or priests.

McElroy’s appointment also highlights Pope Francis’ broader engagement with U.S. politics. In 2024, the pontiff made headlines when he urged voters to carefully consider their choices, describing the act of voting as a moral responsibility. During a press conference aboard the papal plane, Francis remarked on the complexities of American politics, advising voters to choose “the lesser evil” when faced with challenging decisions.

While the pope has criticized Trump’s hardline immigration policies, he has also expressed concern over Vice President Kamala Harris‘ unwavering support for abortion rights. Both stances, Francis noted, conflict with the Church’s teachings on the sanctity of life. “One must choose the lesser of two evils,” the pope reiterated. “Who is the lesser of two evils? That lady or that gentleman? I don’t know. Everyone with a conscience should think on this and do it.”

Despite the pontiff’s cultural influence, his impact on American politics was negligible. In the 2024 presidential election, former President Donald Trump secured a notable share of the Catholic vote, surpassing his performance in previous campaigns. According to exit polls conducted by The Washington Post, Trump won the national Catholic vote by a 15-point margin, with 56% supporting him compared to 41% for Vice President Kamala Harris.

This represents a notable shift compared to the 2020 election, where the Catholic electorate was nearly evenly split, with 50% supporting Trump and 49% favoring Joe Biden, a lifelong Catholic.

In the 2016 election, Trump secured 52% of the Catholic vote, while Hillary Clinton received 45%.

The 2024 election also saw variations within the Catholic demographic. Trump’s support among white Catholics increased, with 59% backing him compared to Harris’s 39%, a 20-point margin. This was an improvement over his 15-point lead in 2020.

Marburg79, CC BY-SA 3.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Among Latino Catholics, there was a significant shift toward Trump. In 2020, Biden led this group by a substantial margin, but in 2024, Trump’s support increased notably, contributing to his overall gains among Catholic voters.

The appointment of McElroy is likely to spark further debate within the Church, where a widening schism between liberal and conservative leaders continue to grow. However, it also reflects Francis’ commitment to shaping the Church’s leadership in a way that emphasizes his vision for pastoral care and inclusivity, even at the expense of unity.

Yet, in the United States, voting trends strongly suggest that Trump’s campaign strategies—including selecting Senator JD Vance, a Catholic, as his running mate, and making explicit appeals to Catholic voters—resonated with this demographic, contributing to increased GOP support in the 2024 election and possibly beyond.

Article Published With The Permission of American Liberty News.

Biden Administration Sued Over Scheme To Revoke Trump Q Security Clearance

2
President Donald J. Trump is presented with a 10th Combat Aviation Brigade challenge coin following an air assault and gun rain demonstration at Fort Drum, New York, on August 13. The demonstration was part of President Trump's visit to the 10th Mountain Division (LI) to sign the National Defense Authorization Act of 2019, which increases the Army's authorized active-duty end strength by 4,000 enabling us to field critical capabilities in support of the National Defense Strategy. (U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Thomas Scaggs) 180813-A-TZ475-010

The non-profit public interest law firm Judicial Watch reports they filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Energy for “records about the retroactive termination of former President Donald Trump’s security clearance and/or access to classified information.”

Judicial Watch reports the lawsuit “cites Trump’s January 12, 2024, motion to compel discovery in his criminal prosecution in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, in which the former president asserts that DOE attempted to terminate his security clearance retroactively after his June 2023 indictment by Special Counsel Jack Smith.”

“It looks like the Department of Energy is trying to manufacture a criminal case,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “What are they hiding?”

Judicial Watch reports the lawsuit “points to the February 2024 response to Trump’s January 2024 motion in which Smith acknowledges the existence of a June 2023 memorandum prepared by an Energy Department official regarding the security clearance.”

“The Special Counsel’s office describes the memorandum’s contents and asserts that it had produced the record to Trump,” Judicial Watch reports. “Smith also acknowledges requesting and receiving additional ‘responsive’ records from DOE, including ‘approximately 30 pages of records and eight emails.’ Smith asserts that he was ‘now producing’ the 30 pages to Trump and withholding the eight emails.”

“Trump’s lawyers suggest in the January 2024 motion to compel discovery that Trump had a high-level security clearance as recently as 2023,” Judicial Watch notes.

“Lawyers for Trump say a government document from June 2023 still listed him with a “Q” clearance from the DOE. The document was dated a few weeks after prosecutors indicted Trump in the classified documents case,” Judicial Watch reports. “A ‘Q’ clearance refers to a type of security clearance handled by the Department of Energy, which holds classified information focused largely on nuclear secrets.”

Judicial Watch reports it “filed the lawsuit after the Energy Department failed to comply with a January 18, 2024, FOIA request for its records and communications concerning retroactively terminating Trump’s security clearance and/or access to classified information.”

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

Is ‘The Fix In’ Again? What’s Up With Hunter Biden’s Legal Case?

5
President Joe Biden hugs his family during the 59th Presidential Inauguration ceremony in Washington, Jan. 20, 2021. President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris took the oath of office on the West Front of the U.S. Capitol. (DOD Photo by Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Carlos M. Vazquez II)

ANALYSIS – Federal prosecutors are seeking a grand jury indictment of Joe Biden’s son, Hunter. And while the investigation is a fresh setback to his father’s 2024 re-election bid, some believe ‘the fix could still be in.’

It is unclear what charges the U.S. Attorney for Delaware David Weiss plans to file against Hunter. 

But, according to court papers, the newly named ‘special counsel’ said he expects an indictment before September 29, which is just before the statute of limitations runs out on Hunter’s felony gun charge.

Of course, the time has almost run out because Weiss took years to complete the hyper simple investigation — and is still stalling.

And Weiss didn’t have to announce the grand jury indictment is coming. He could have just done it instead.

The court filing is related to a felony gun charge alleging that Hunter Biden illegally possessed a firearm in October 2018 while he was a drug user. He is also under federal investigation for his business dealings and failing to pay taxes on tens of millions of dollars earned mostly from shady foreign sources in 2017 and 2018.

In June, Hunter Biden agreed to a sweetheart plea deal where he would plead guilty to misdemeanor tax offences, and separately get a ‘diversion’ program for the gun charge. The plea agreement fell apart after U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika, appointed by President Donald Trump, correctly questioned it during a court appearance in July.

It turned out Hunter Biden believed the deal would give him blanket immunity from any future prosecution. Federal prosecutors were forced to admit that wasn’t really the case. 

Weiss didn’t have the authority to give global blanket immunity then. But as ‘special counsel’ appointed by Joe Biden, Weiss does now.

Due to foot dragging and failures to cooperate by the FBI and other federal agencies, congressional Republicans are considering launching an impeachment inquiry against Joe Biden, alleging that he had played a role in his son’s shady foreign business affairs and influence peddling scheme.

The inquiry would give the Congress full authority to force the reluctant, partisan bureaucrats to pony up all records requested.

In July, the House of Representatives oversight committee said bank records showed Joe Biden’s family and associates received $20 million from oligarchs in Russia, Kazakhstan and Ukraine during his vice presidency from 2009-2017.

“If you look at all the information we have been able to gather so far, it is a natural step forward that you would have to go to an impeachment inquiry,” House Speaker Kevin McCarthy recently said on Fox News.

That’s why the actions of Weiss are concerning. Many legal experts, and Republican opponents, see Weiss using the gun charge as leverage to get Hunter to renegotiate another, similarly weak, plea deal.

As the New York Post reported:

David Weinstein, a former federal prosecutor, told The Post that an indictment on that gun charge is “not that significant” and could be merely “a placeholder” — meaning Weiss could still potentially bring a case against Biden related to any potential illegal foreign dealings or felony tax charges.

“It’s holding in place the ability to use his leverage — a felony gun charge — in negotiations with Hunter Biden to resolve his global criminal exposure,” Weinstein said.

Cornell Law Professor Robert Hockett told The Post he agreed that an indictment on the gun charge could be used to bring about a larger settlement to shut all this down.

Weinstein added that he doesn’t believe Weiss “is going to end up playing hardball” in potential negotiations with Hunter’s legal team.

But Hockett said that Weiss would be cautious to avoid the appearance of going easy on the president’s son, especially given the barrage of criticism Weiss received on the prior plea deal.

Still, the GOP-led Congress should move ahead forcefully on an impeachment inquiry. It may be the only way to finally get to the truth about the Bidens’ shady deals.

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

Dowdy Jill Biden Graces Cover Of Vogue, Supermodel Melania Trump Shunned

2

ANALYSIS – Totally tone deaf. Just a little reminder of how ridiculously biased, partisan and idiotic our mainstream media has become, including the fluffy fashion forums.

First Lady Jill Biden, the incredibly unstylish, power-hungry, social climbing, faux intellectual with an unserious Doctor of Education (EdD), has again graced the cover of Vogue magazine.

This, her third time, right before the upcoming election. (RELATED: Poor Sign Placement Haunts Jill Biden At Hunter High School)

The New York Post noted how remarkably out of touch the Biden White House is:

After Biden’s horrific debate performance on Thursday, much of the media world reluctantly conceded that our 46th president looks like a lost toddler.

And then there’s Vogue — which literally couldn’t stop the presses. The fashion-bible-turned-Dem-PR-machine was already rolling out its July issue, with cover model Jill Biden in a silk cream Ralph Lauren dress that retails for $4,990.

Office of the President of the United States, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

The magazine landed on the internet Monday morning with a resounding, wincing thud.

It was tone deaf. It was tacky — but this shoot and interview, conducted months ago, would have been messy even if the debate disaster had never happened.

Fox News host Jimmy Failla on X had this to say about the horrible caregiver of the elderly and frail Joe Biden:

Melania Trump is an actual super model who speaks 5 languages but she’s NEVER been on the cover of Vogue. Jill Biden commits vicious elder abuse on the world stage and now has two Vogue covers to show for it. Congrats Jill, you’ll be great in “The Devil Wears Depends.”

Newsweek noted the backlash:

Former NBC senior executive Mike Sington said, “First Lady Jill Biden appears on the cover of Vogue magazine, which seems like a good time to remind you that Melania Trump never appeared on the cover of Vogue when she was First Lady.”

C.J. Pearson, a co-chair of the GOP Youth Advisory Council, said: “Outside of how tone deaf this following Joe Biden‘s disastrous debate performance, it is even more absurd that Jill Biden somehow graced the cover of Vogue and @MELANIATRUMP was never given the opportunity. Asinine even.”

Another user on X noted: “She will NEVER be Melania.”

Dr. Jill, as she insists on being called, first appeared on a Vogue cover in 2021 right after Joe Biden was inaugurated. She later appeared on the cover of the digital Winter 2023 issue. 

Meanwhile, Melania Trump, an actual former supermodel who speaks several languages, and was exemplary, and always stylish and immaculately attired, as first lady is still shunned by the fashion world.

Back in 2005, when she was getting married to The Donald, and well before Trump became president, Melania did get her own Vogue cover as Trump’s new bride. But oddly, she never again got a cover for Vogue or any other fashion, or mainstream magazine. (RELATED: Melania Trump Addresses Jan. 6 for First Time)

Newsweek noted the backlash:

Former NBC senior executive Mike Sington said, “First Lady Jill Biden appears on the cover of Vogue magazine, which seems like a good time to remind you that Melania Trump never appeared on the cover of Vogue when she was First Lady.”

C.J. Pearson, a co-chair of the GOP Youth Advisory Council, said: “Outside of how tone deaf this following Joe Biden‘s disastrous debate performance, it is even more absurd that Jill Biden somehow graced the cover of Vogue and @MELANIATRUMP was never given the opportunity. Asinine even.”

Another user on X noted: “She will NEVER be Melania.”

The fact that she never landed a Vogue cover in her White House years was such a point of consternation that the former First Lady Trump criticized Wintour, who also serves as Condé Nast’s chief content officer, for it during a 2022 Fox News interview.

WWD reported:

As Jill Biden‘s role in encouraging President Joe Biden to stay in the presidential race — despite his lackluster performance in Thursday night’s debate with Donald Trump — continues to be hashed over in the media and around the globe, Vogue debuted its August issue with the first lady on its cover.

In this already deeply divided country, the Condé Nast fashion magazine — intentionally or not — has ratcheted up the public dispute about Biden’s full-steam-ahead plans. As of Monday afternoon, Vogue‘s post of the first lady’s cover had 51,960 likes and 5,286 comments. The first lady donned an ivory Ralph Lauren Collection dress for the Norman Jean Roy-shot cover that accompanied Maya Singer’s interview.

Of course, Vogue’s editorial direction is strongly liberal. WWD added:

Requests for comment from Vogue’s global editorial director Anna Wintour and Singer through a Vogue spokesperson were declined. The company spokesperson said, “It’s no secret that Anna has been a supporter of Democratic campaigns for decades. Our August cover story is a look at the tremendous work Dr. Biden has done, and the most urgent issues in 2024 and beyond.”

Meanwhile, a parting comment: Newsmax’s Rob Schmitt wrote, “Nice puff piece on the most valueless person in America and her bid to keep her corpse-like husband into the White House to stay relevant.”

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

Cruz Drops Bombshell Bill to Stop Scheme That Uses Taxpayer Funds to Push Companies into Woke Socialism

1
Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America,

The federal government could no longer use taxpayer-funded retirement accounts to push companies to adopt leftist political policies, under a new bill from U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz.

The move counters a recent strategy by leftist radicals to gain control over the voting shares of publicly-held corporations, then vote in radical leftist policies that push “woke” social goals and divert billions in cash to activist groups.

One of the biggest shareholders in many corporations are retirement funds held by and managed for federal employees by BlackRock, a far-left, multinational hedge fund.

Cruz has introduced the Stop TSP ESG Act, which “will prevent companies that manage investment funds held in federal employee retirement accounts from using those holdings to vote in corporate shareholder meetings to force leftist Environmental, Social, Governance (ESG) and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) policies onto private sector businesses.”

Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.) is co-sponsoring the bill in the Senate. 

Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) previously introduced companion legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives.

“BlackRock is able to leverage its position as the fund manager to vote in shareholder meetings and to force publicly traded companies to adopt ESG and DEI policies, even if doing so adversely affects investor value. As such, BlackRock prioritizes its political agenda over the interests of employees and retirees who are seeking to maximize their return on investment,” a statement from Cruz’s office reads.

 “I am proud to join Congressman Buck and sponsor this legislation in the Senate to hold investment fund managers accountable and ensure they do not misuse their position as a fiduciary to advance an agenda contrary to the interests of their investors,” said Cruz.

“As the managing entity of TSP, BlackRock is leveraging the financial weight of the federal retirement system to push their woke ESG and DEI ideology through other peoples’ investments. BlackRock’s manipulation and brazen politicization of federal retirement accounts is wrong and should not be tolerated,” said Cruz.

“For years, BlackRock has been leveraging taxpayer money to force unwilling businesses to accept ESG and DEI policies. Through its position as the manager of the federal Thrift Savings Plan, BlackRock has abused public capital to push a radical agenda and censor conservative media,” said Buck.

 “Woke Wall Street has been using the federal Thrift Savings Plan to force a radical left-wing agenda on the country. That’s a violation of their fiduciary duty and the basic precepts of democracy. Policy should be made in Congress, not BlackRock’s C-Suite,” said Will Hild, Executive Director at Consumers’ Research.

“The Stop TSP ESG Act is an important step in stopping the radical ESG agenda by protecting TSP account holders. BlackRock CEO Larry Fink admits to ‘forcing behaviors.’ Shareholders may be unknowingly supporting companies that disparage their values as proxy voting decisions are made by these radicals. Thank you, Rep. Buck, for introducing this legislation,” said Penny Nance, CEO and President of Concerned Women for America Legislative Action Committee.

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

Biden Scheme To Spy On Trump Supporter Bank Accounts Even Wider Than Reported

1
Image via Pixabay free images.

Congressional investigators are demanding additional documents and information from financial institutions nationwide amid revelations that a Biden administration operation to spy on millions of bank accounts to identify suspected January 6 rioters was even more widespread than previously reported.

U.S. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) sent letters to the Chief Executive Officers of Standard Chartered Bank USA, Truist, U.S. Bank, Wells Fargo, Western Union, Charles Schwab, Bank of America, Citibank, HSBC Bank, JPMorgan Chase, MUFG Bank, PayPal, and Santander Bank requesting “documents and communications related to the Committee’s investigation of financial surveillance of American citizens, including the disclosure of private financial records to federal authorities without legal process.”

“Documents obtained by the Committee and Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government show that the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) circulated specific materials to these banks, and the Committee believes that these banking institutions possess information necessary for the investigation,” the Judiciary Committee reports. 

“The Committee previously sent letters to Bank of America, Chase, U.S. Bank, Wells Fargo, Citibank, and Truist for its probe into how the FBI worked together with banks to spy on Americans following the events of January 6, 2021, without a warrant,” the Committee reports.

“The Committee also sent a letter to U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen demanding all Bank Secrecy Act filings, including Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs), that included the tag created to group all SARs related to the events following January 6, 2021,” the Committee adds.

Excerpts of Jordan’s letter to Charles Schwab, for example, read:

“After receiving documents and information from several entities, the Committee and Select Subcommittee learned that the financial surveillance occurring in the United States is much broader than the FBI simply requesting, without any legal process, a list of customers’ transactions from Bank of America. On March 6, 2024, the Committee and Select Subcommittee released an interim staff report detailing its findings to date on how federal law enforcement is using private banks to pry into the private transactions of American customers. That report highlighted how, following January 6, 2021, federal law enforcement commandeered financial institutions’ databases, sought to treat sweeping classes of otherwise lawful transactions as potentially ‘suspicious,’ and profiled Americans using Merchant Category Codes (MCCs), ‘typologies,’ and ‘indicators’ that treated protected political and religious expression as indicative of domestic violent extremism.

“The Committee and Select Subcommittee remain concerned about how and to what extent federal law enforcement and financial institutions continue to spy on Americans by weaponizing backdoor information sharing and casting sprawling classes of transactions, purchase behavior, and protected political or religious expression as potentially ‘suspicious’ or indicative of ‘extremism.'”

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

Fighting Back Against Trans ‘Drag Story Time’ Imposed on Our Kids in Public Libraries

3

ANALYSIS – Conservatives are finally fighting back against the trans agenda being imposed on our children at public libraries and bookstores via ‘Drag Queen Story Times.’ 

This bizarre and offensive program sends outrageously outfitted cross-dressing men into public libraries to read stories to small impressionable children. 

The goal? To indoctrinate, if not groom, these children into accepting and exploring the trans lifestyle. 

The secondary effect, exposing children to sexual themes, including mock stripping, they have no right to be exposing them to. 

In some cases, these grown men dressed as women have been caught fondling children or acting inappropriately.

And yet, our taxpayer-funded public libraries across the country allow these bizarre events.

And too many ignorant, brainwashed, horrible parents allow their children to attend.

They are also increasingly occurring at other venues as well. But the goals are always the same.

Thankfully, conservatives are finally fighting back.

One way has been by loudly and publicly calling out examples of sexual abuse, and inappropriate touching or sexual behavior by these drag queens, and by protesting their presence in front of small children.

In early December one Trans-friendly venue, The Starlighter, in Texas was forced to cancel a slew of drag queen story hours after a public outcry over the outrageous antics of some of these cross-dressing men.

Most of it was due to video and images taken at an event and widely shared by conservative critics.

The Christian Post reported that this event featured a showing of the 1960s TV classic “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer” while a rainbow flag with the number “666” hung on the walls.

What was worse, a video taken at this event showed a young girl no older than 7, who appeared unattended, with these men in drag dancing suggestively and singing lyrics such as, “Under the mistletoe/ Yes, everybody knows/ We will take off our clothes.”

One of the cross-dressing men was also recorded touching and stroking the young girl’s hair. The little girl is also seen handing money to one of the drag performers, as if at a strip club.

Another video clip, reports the Christian Post, “showed the young child visibly shrink back as a drag queen in all black leather, devil horns and face makeup as the man in drag sings, ‘Get your tickets to the freak show, baby / Step right up to watch the freak go crazy.’”

Another way conservatives are fighting back is protesting loudly and aggressively like the Left does, constantly, and at the drop of a hat.

But doing so peacefully.

In one case in early December reported NBC News:

The hosts of a “Drag Queen Story Hour”-style event for children in Columbus, Ohio, on Saturday pulled the plug because of what they described as the intimidating presence of right-wing demonstrators.

The scheduled holiday themed “Holi-Drag Storytime” at the First Unitarian Church of Columbus, which runs the K-5 institution behind the event, Red Oak Community School, was canceled at the last-minute Saturday morning following internal discussions, organizers said.

Members of Ohio’s Proud Boys organization and other right-wing groups made good on promises to make waves outside the venue Saturday. More than 50 demonstrators, including members of the Proud Boys, gathered near the church Saturday morning and shouted, chanted and held up signs. Some were armed with long guns.

This appears to be a very effective technique, learned from the Left. Speak loudly, and carry a big stick.

But then there is another way to counter this insidiously harmful movement’s efforts targeting our children. 

That way is to promote a wholesome, Christian, family-focused counter-narrative and events at these same venues. And threaten legal action if they discriminate against you, or refuse to allow it.

As Newsmax reported, actor and author Kirk Cameron said recently: “Conservatives need to stop being on defense against the culture and start going on offense to take it back.

He added:

Just complaining about the culture doesn’t change the culture. We’ve got to get off the defense, to get on the offense. And I think for decades, we as concerned citizens, as people who understand the importance of faith and morality, have been asleep. And when we’re asleep, we’re unaware and we’re unengaged.

Cameron added that now that we’ve woken up, if we remain unengaged, “that’s on us.”

Newsmax continued:

Cameron then called on every parent and grandparent to take their favorite children’s book that has wholesome values, good and godly morals, and call their library if it has hosted a Drag Story Hour and ask if they can read their book during story hour.

“If they say ‘no,'” Cameron said, “they’re likely breaking the law; and you can contact us at Bravebooks.com. We’ll show you how to host your own story hour, will donate to you a free book with all the instructions and guidance.

“And I personally put some of these libraries on notice with a public letter that says, ‘I hope you’ll reconsider; here’s a free book. But if you double down, I’m prepared to assert my constitutional rights in court,'” Cameron stated.

So, the peaceful fight against depravity continues. Pick your fighting style, and get engaged. GAND

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

Amanda Head: Who’s Your Pick For 2024 – Trump or DeSantis?

6

As Americans continue to wait for official midterm results to trickle in Republicans are already diving themselves into two camps: Ron DeSantis or Donald Trump.

Who are you siding with?

Watch Amanda break it down below.