Random

    Opinion

    Home Opinion Page 39

    Trump’s Much-Needed ‘Radical’ Second Term Agenda

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    3
    Gage Skidmore Flickr

    ANALYSIS – Former President Donald Trump is thinking bigly. In his bid to return to the Oval Office, Trump and his allies have promised a sweeping transformation of the federal government.

    And while the left and their mass media puppets decry these plans as radical, they are mostly a much-needed corrective after four years of truly extreme and disastrous Biden policies.

    If he returns to the White House in 2024, Trump is planning to root­ out polit­ical foes (dismantle the hyper political and leftist ‘deep state’), deport millions of illegal migrants who have invaded the U.S. under Joe Biden, slap tar­iffs on imports and scal­e back involvement in over­seas wars.

    I’m hoping that the last pledge doesn’t mean misguided global retreats, but instead ‘recalibrating’ to force NATO allies to do more in Europe, while we focus on China, for example.

    And though no longer talking about a ‘wall,’ Trump says he would “fully secure” the southern border, ending mass unskilled illegal immigration through Mexico.

    Trump’s allies are also working on executive orders and studying the Constitution in anticipation of legal challenges.

    As CNN reported:

    The goal is to have executive orders prepared – on everything from immigration to the removal of government protections for civil servants – for Trump to sign on day one of a potential second administration.

    Meanwhile, ‘Project 2025’, a significant effort run by the conservative Heritage Foundation, has brought many of these groups together to “pave the way for an effective conservative administration.”

    Trump’s plan includes asserting more White House control over the Department of Justice (DOJ), which he says he would use to pursue his relentlessly weaponized persecutors, plus reigning in the increasingly politicized FBI and Centers for Disease Control (CDC).

    The former president has also promised to issue pardons to “a large portion” of the nonviolent rioters jailed after the January 6, 2021, assault on the Capitol. Too many of them have received obscenely long sentences for minor, nonviolent crimes.

    And he isn’t giving Biden a pass. CNN noted:

    “I will appoint a real special prosecutor to go after the most corrupt president in the history of the United States of America, Joe Biden, and the entire Biden crime family,” Trump also said in June after his arraignment in Florida.

    “I will totally obliterate the Deep State.”

    One of Trump’s more sweeping, and welcome, proposals is ‘Agenda 47’: The large-scale arrest, detention, and mass deportation of illegal immigrants. Trump also plans to end automatic citizenship for children born to illegal migrants.

    Additionally, Trump vows to revive many of his effective first-term immigration policies to restrict both legal and illegal immigration – including reinstating and expanding a travel ban on predominantly-Muslim countries.

    He has also vowed to designate deadly Mexican drug cartels as foreign terrorist organizations (FTOs) and to impose the death penalty at the federal level on drug dealers and human traffickers.

    But there’s more. As Barrons reported:

    Trump says he would also deploy the National Guard “to restore law and order” in liberal cities and would investigate “radical Marxist prosecutors” refusing to punish disorder.

    Trump has weighed in on most of the so-called “culture war” issues that polarize Americans, from abortion, transgender rights and gun control to the teaching of America’s racist history.

    The candidate says he would crack down on doctors providing gender-affirming care to minors and “pink haired communists” pushing critical race theory or “inappropriate” political material in schools.

    Trump would also create a new tax credit, he said, to reimburse teachers for concealed carry firearms and training…

    While some of these plans do hold the potential for abuse, the current system is already being abused in an unprecedented manner. 

    To quote the Joker played by Jack Nicholson in the 1989 Batman movie: “this town needs an enema.” And Trump may be the one providing it.

    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

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    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.

    Liberal City Hit With Class Action Lawsuit Over Reparations Scheme

    By
    Donny Ferguson
    -
    2

    A left-wing city council faces a class action lawsuit from concerned citizens over a scheme to give an average $25,000 in financial assistance to citizens based on their skin color.

    The non-profit public interest law firm Judicial Watch announced in a statement a hearing in its “class action civil rights lawsuit filed against Evanston, Illinois, on behalf of six individuals over the city’s reparations program.”

    “To date, Evanston has awarded over $6,350,000 to 254 individuals based on their race. The city must be stopped before it spends even more money on this clearly discriminatory and unconstitutional reparations program,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

    “The court ordered the in-person hearing for oral argument on Evanston’s pending motion to dismiss the lawsuit,” Judicial Watch reports.

    Judicial Watch reports it “filed the lawsuit over the city’s use of race as an eligibility requirement for a reparations program, which makes $25,000 direct cash payments to black residents and descendants of black residents who lived in Evanston between the years 1919 and 1969.”

    According to The New Republic, program will also reportedly give financial assistance to their descendants, who never experienced racism in Evanston.

    Judicial Watch alleges “that the program violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.”

    In its response to the city’s motion to dismiss, Judicial Watch states:

    [T]he program’s use of a race-based eligibility requirement is presumptively unconstitutional, and remedying societal discrimination is not a compelling government interest. Nor has remedying discrimination from as many as 105 years ago or remedying intergenerational discrimination ever been recognized as a compelling government interest. Among the program’s other fatal flaws is that it uses race as a proxy for discrimination without requiring proof of discrimination. 

    Senator Kennedy’s Latest Book Strikes Back — Politicians Are Stunned [CONTRIBUTE TODAY TO RECEIVE A FREE COPY]

    Trump Dominates GOP Presidential Rivals as Biden Approval Tanking

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    4
    Donald Trump via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    ANALYSIS – Even as the indictments pile up, or maybe because of them, a new national NBC News poll finds former President Donald Trump expanding his national lead in the Republican presidential nominating contest to 43 points over his nearest rival, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis.

    Trump leads the first-choice field with 59% of national Republican primary voters. In comparison, Ron DeSantis gets support from 16% — followed by former United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley at 7% and former Vice President Mike Pence at 4%.

    The poll also includes an all-time high disapproval of Joe Biden’s job performance. Fewer than 4 in 10 voters (37%) approve of his handling of the economy. This is huge.

    As NBC News reported: 

    Deeper inside those numbers, Biden is underwater among voters between the ages of 18 and 34 (46% of them approve of his job performance), all women (46%), Latinos (43%) and independents (36%).

    What’s more, the NBC News poll finds 37% of voters approve of Biden’s handling of the economy, and 41% approve of his handling of foreign policy.

    Biden is also taking a big hit for his open borders policy and unprecedented waves of illegal immigration on his watch, as also shown by a recent The Washington Post-ABC News poll. 

    Axios noted: 

    “A variety of factors may be at play,” [ABC News’ Gary] Langer writes in his analysis. “Biden’s poor performance ratings, the extent of economic discontent, the immigration crisis and doubts about his age clearly are relevant.”

    Axios added: “In the Post-ABC poll, 44% said they’re worse off — the most for any president in the poll since… 1986, ABC News’ Gary Langer said in his poll analysis.”

    “In NBC, Biden’s disapproval rating is the highest of his term for that poll.”

    NBC News also noted that: “Another 60% have major concerns (45%) or moderate concerns (15%) about Biden’s possible awareness or involvement in the business dealings of his son, Hunter, including alleged financial wrongdoing and corruption.”

    “This [NBC] survey is a startling flashing red light for an incumbent party,” said Republican pollster Bill McInturff of Public Opinion Strategies. McInturff conducted the September 15-19 poll with Democratic pollster Jeff Horwitt and his team at Hart Research Associates.

    “Yes, the numbers for Biden aren’t where he needs them to be,” said Horwitt. However, Trump and Republicans have challenges, such as the GOP front-runner’s unpopularity with the general electorate.

    Most polls show that both Trump and Biden have high unfavorability going into a general election.

    NBC News reported: “Three-quarters of voters say they’re concerned about President Joe Biden’s age and mental fitness, while nearly two-thirds have concerns about the multiple trials former President Donald Trump faces, a new national NBC News poll finds, casting a gloomy shadow over the upcoming 2024 presidential election.”

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

    CNN Blasted for Hiring ‘Spy Who Lied’ About Hunter Laptop

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    0
    Jay Godwin, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

    ANALYSIS – One of the most egregious efforts at election interference in 2020 was when the Joe Biden campaign successfully quashed the bombshell New York Post story of Hunter Biden’s laptop. 

    The laptop has proven to hold a treasure trove of incriminating evidence against the Bidens.

    But it was effectively kept from the American people in the final weeks of the campaign through a concerted conspiracy between the Biden campaign, Big Tech social media companies, the major news networks, and a group of former spies.

    And one of those who helped hide it from the public is now an on-air CNN analyst.

    It has since been documented that Antony Blinken, then with the Biden campaign, now Biden Secretary of State, retained former senior U.S. intelligence officials to smear the laptop story as Russian disinformation.

    As I have written about, 51 former spooks eventually signed a letter calling the laptop story likely Russian disinformation. This was then used as justification by the media to censor and ban the story.

    One of the most senior of those partisan intelligence hacks was ex-Director of National Intelligence (DNI) James Clapper. 

    As a reward for his disservice, Clapper has now been hired by CNN as an analyst where he will be able to spew disinformation on all manner of national security and political topics.

    And Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy made a big deal about this on a recent CNN appearance. 

    In a tense back-and-forth exchange with the reporter McCarthy ignored the question about Trump’s classified documents case and instead emphasized that Clapper had been one of dozens of former intelligence officials who signed the letter dismissing the Post’s October 2020 expose on Hunter’s laptop as a Russian disinformation.

    He also threw in CNN’s hiring of discredited former deputy FBI chief Andrew McCabe who was fired for leaking classified information.

    Fox News reported:

    “Are you prepared to defend your network, CNN?” McCarthy said as they spoke over each other. “Even though your network hired Andrew McCabe, who was fired from the FBI for leaking classified documents, did you remove him from your network? No, you continue to put him on to give judgment against President Trump. You also hired Clapper …”

    McCarthy later continued, according to Fox:

    “So, your network hires Clapper, who literally lied to the American public – one of 51 other individuals that had briefings and used it politically to tell the American public that a laptop was Russia collusion, even though it had all this information about the Biden administration,” the speaker said.

    “Are you prepared to get rid of those people from your network? Because my concern as a policymaker is that when [you] weaponize government, and now you’re weaponizing networks, that is wrong,” McCarthy continued. “I have a real problem that your network actually pays people who did classified information and then lied to the American public to try to influence a presidential election, and then you put them on your network to give an opinion.”

    This line of attack against CNN and other major news outlets who hire ex-officials involved in partisan election interference is valid and should be continued. 

    This goes well beyond just being partisan.

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

    Trump Tax Return Leaker Asked To Appear Before Congress After Outrageous Sentence

    By
    Donny Ferguson
    -
    2
    Donald Trump via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    The former IRS contractor who got a sweetheart plea agreement from the Biden administration after stealing and leaking the private tax information of President Donald Trump, will soon have to answer to Congress.

    The House Judiciary Committee reports Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) sent a letter “requesting that Charles E. Littlejohn, a former Internal Revenue Service (IRS) contractor who leaked tax information belonging to hundreds of thousands of Americans, including President Donald Trump and Elon Musk, appear before the Committee.”

    “In February, the IRS informed the Committee that Littlejohn had leaked the private data of more than 400,000 taxpayers—nearly six times higher than the 70,000 figure initially reported by the Biden-Harris IRS,” the Committee reports, noting it “raised concerns related to the Department of Justice’s sweetheart plea deal Littlejohn received, which resulted in a light sentence despite the severity of the data breach.”

    Despite pulling off what may be the greatest data theft in IRS history, which the presiding judge called “a threat to our democracy,” and exhibiting little remorse, Biden administration prosecutors allowed Littlejohn to plead guilty to only one minor charge, giving him the lightest possible sentence.

    Jordan’s letter reads, in part:

    “Since the 118th Congress, the Committee has been conducting oversight into the unprecedented leak of protected taxpayer information by your client, Charles E. Littlejohn. On January 29, 2024, the Department of Justice (DOJ) allowed Mr. Littlejohn, a former Internal Revenue Service (IRS) contractor, to plead guilty to only one count of unauthorized disclosure of tax information for leaking ‘thousands of individuals’ and entities’ tax returns,’ including President Trump’s tax information. Since then, the Committee has obtained information showing that the scope of the leak is much broader than the Biden-Harris Administration led the public to believe—affecting over 400,000 taxpayers. In light of this new information, Mr. Littlejohn’s testimony is critical to the Committee’s oversight efforts and advancement of potential legislative reforms. We therefore respectfully request his testimony. 

    “In 2017, Mr. Littlejohn applied to work as an IRS contractor with the expressed intention of accessing and disclosing President Trump’s tax returns. Not only did Mr. Littlejohn succeed in obtaining and leaking President Trump’s returns, he also disclosed ‘thousands of Americans’ federal tax returns and other private financial information’ to the New York Times and ProPublica, which together published more than 50 articles relying on the stolen information. Despite the Biden-Garland Justice Department referring to his unauthorized disclosures as ‘unparalleled in the IRS’s history,’ it only charged Mr. Littlejohn with one count of unauthorized disclosure of tax information, which resulted in a five-year prison sentence, three years’ supervised release, and a $5,000 fine. The judge who oversaw Mr. Littlejohn’s sentencing, admitted that she was ‘perplexed’ and ‘troubled’ by the plea agreement.

    “After Mr. Littlejohn’s sentencing, the IRS began notifying and assisting affected taxpayers. In May 2024, an IRS spokesman stated, ‘[m]ore than 70,000 people received the initial notice that their information was involved in the breach.’ However, in December 2024, the IRS issued a second wave of notifications to additional taxpayer victims. On February 14, 2025, the IRS disclosed to the Committee that it had ‘mailed notifications to 405,427 taxpayers whose taxpayer information was inappropriately disclosed by Mr. Littlejohn’ and that ’89 [percent] of the[se] taxpayers are business entities.’

    “In light of this new disclosure that Mr. Littlejohn leaked hundreds of thousands of taxpayers’ information—not just ‘thousands’ as previously suggested—the Biden-Harris Administration’s decision to charge him with just one count of unauthorized disclosure of tax information is even more concerning. The Committee has jurisdiction over criminal law and federal law enforcement pursuant to House Rule X. As such, to develop effective legislation, such as reforms to DOJ procedures governing plea agreements and new statutory limits of the Crime Victims’ Rights Act, Mr. Littlejohn’s testimony is necessary.

    “Accordingly, we write to request Mr. Littlejohn’s testimony before the Committee on the Judiciary as soon as practicable. Please confirm his appearance before the Committee as soon as possible, but no later than 5:00 p.m. on March 31, 2025. We will also work with the Federal Bureau of Prisons to facilitate his testimony in a timely manner.”

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

    Amanda Head: Liberal Supreme Court Justice Is Obsessed With Race

    By
    Amanda Head
    -
    2
    Duncan Lock, Dflock, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

    The U.S. Supreme Court is in a sorry state of affairs.

    One liberal-leaning justice just can’t seem to shake this obsession with race… and the implications are dangerous for the country.

    Watch Amanda break down the problem below:

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

    By
    Donny Ferguson
    -
    3

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Reuters summarized the findings, noting:

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Legal Theorists Try To Attack Trump. Their Argument May Be Dead On Arrival.

    By
    Norman Leahy
    -
    4
    Donald Trump via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    A novel legal theory from two conservative legal scholars published in the University of Pennsylvania Law Review that a section of the 14th Amendment makes Donald Trump ineligible to run for president may be getting a court hearing in Florida.

    As Ballot Access news editor emeritus Richard Winger notes:

    On August 24, a Florida voter, Lawrence Caplan, filed a federal lawsuit seeking to bar former President Donald Trump from being placed on 2024 ballots as a presidential candidate. Caplan v Trump, s.d., 0:23cv-61618.

    Caplan, who appears to be representing himself in the case, writes:

    Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which provides for the disqualification of an individual who commits insurrection against our government has remained on the books for some one hundred and fifty plus years without ever facing question as to its legitimacy. While one can certainly argue that it has not been thoroughly tested, that fact is only because we have not faced an insurrection against our federal government such as the one while we faced on January 6, 2021. It should also be noted that President Trump has since made statements to the effect that should he be elected, he would advocate the total elimination of the US Constitution and the creation of a new charter more in line with his personal values.

    Winger believes Caplan’s suit is “misguided:”

    The Fourteenth Amendment “insurrection clause” bars individuals from being sworn in to certain offices, but it does not bar them from seeking the office. When the Fourteenth Amendment was passed, there was no mechanism to prevent any voter from voting for any candidate.

    Caplan appears to be taking the law review article’s authors, William Baude and Michael Stokes Paulson, at their word:

    “No official should shrink from these duties. It would be wrong — indeed, arguably itself a breach of one’s constitutional oath of office — to abandon one’s responsibilities of faithful interpretation, application, and enforcement of Section Three,” Bode and Paulsen write.

    Alternatively, ordinary citizens could file challenges on the same grounds with state election officials themselves.

    And other such suits may emerge over the coming weeks. I’m not convinced any federal judge will be willing to read Section 3 like Baude and Paulson say it should be. It’s not because the Section’s words aren’t clear – they are.

    My concerns are akin to those of Cato’s Walter Olsen, who writes:

    …no one should assume that just because Baude and Paulsen have made a powerful intellectual case for their originalist reading, that the Supreme Court will declare itself convinced and disqualify Trump. Justice Antonin Scalia memorably described himself as a “faint‐​hearted originalist,” which captures something important about the thinking of almost every Justice—if overruling a wrongly decided old case threatens to disrupt settled expectations to the point of spreading chaos and grief through society, most of them will refrain. Stare decisis, and a general preference for continuity in law, still matters.

    Exactly. While some judges may nurse images of themselves as bold crusaders for justice, most jurists aren’t eager to upset established practice and precedent on a whim. Though, to be fair to the times when such upsets have occurred – Brown v. Board of Education, for example, or Griswold v. Connecticut – have been warranted, necessary, and beneficial.

    Does that apply in the Caplan case? A court will decide. But as I’ve long said about Trump, the only court he cares about is public opinion. If voters reject him, that will carry more weight and sanction than any court could ever deliver.

    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.

    Amanda Head: Done With Bud Light? Buy This Instead!

    By
    Amanda Head
    -
    1

    Are you boycotting Bud Light and looking for a new beer to support? Look no further!

    Watch Amanda explain the situation below:

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

    1...383940Page 39 of 40
    © Great America News Desk 2022