America is waiting…
When will Florida Governor Ron DeSantis officially throw his hat into the ring for the 2024 Republican nomination? Sources close to the governor are spilling the beans…
Watch Amanda explain the situation below:
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – If you can’t beat him, charge him. As I wrote earlier: “From the four-year Hillary Clinton-manufactured ‘Russia collusion’ hoax to corrupt investigations to ‘deep state resistance’ within his administration to a partisan impeachment – no [other] president has been so unfairly hounded in U.S. history.”
But the persecution clearly didn’t end with Donald Trump leaving the White House. The absolute fear he could return to office has since resulted in multiple prosecutions from idiotic nonsense such as his bookkeeping regarding hush money to a porn actress, to sexual assault that reportedly happened 30 years ago.
But that was just the beginning, and those cases were brought by partisan local prosecutors. Now the prosecutorial floodgates have opened wider, with Joe Biden’s Department of Justice (DoJ) being weaponized to go after Trump.
While I have blamed the ex-president for bringing the classified materials charges upon himself – see my earlier piece – there is no doubt that politics is playing a big part as well.
And it is getting hard to keep up with all the charges and case and court timelines. His most recent indictment being related to his words and actions leading up to and during the January 6 Capitol Riot.
“Not guilty,” Trump stressed the first word of his plea on Thursday (August 3) before Magistrate Judge Moxila Upadhyaya.
The arraignment — U.S. special counsel Jack Smith’s second DoJ indictment against the former president — charges Trump with conspiracy to defraud the United States, obstruction, conspiracy to obstruct the Electoral College vote certification, and conspiracy against voter rights.
Charges that could carry serious prison time if convicted.
With the latest four charges, Trump now faces 78 criminal counts.
The 45-page indictment says Trump “pursued unlawful means of discounting legitimate votes and subverting the election results.”
Trump’s next court date will be August 28, when U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, a harsh critic of January 6 defendants, and Obama-appointee, sets a trial date.
“This is a very sad day for America,” Trump told reporters after the hearing, portraying the indictment and the other three criminal cases against him as a “witch hunt” intended to derail his 2024 presidential campaign.
Among the criminal charges that special counsel Jack Smith released; media identified six of Trump’s former lawyers as unnamed co-conspirators in his bid to rig the election.
They possibly are Rudy Giuliani, Trump’s former personal attorney; White House lawyer John Eastman; Trump attorney Sidney Powell; former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark; and attorney Kenneth Chesebro.
The description of the sixth co-conspirator is a “political consultant” and is not immediately apparent — the indictment gives few details.
The consultant identified attorneys who could help carry out a scheme to present fake Electoral College votes to Congress as lawmakers certified the election results.
According to the indictment, co-conspirator No. 2 is a lawyer who drafted a plan to have Vice President Mike Pence throw out Joe Biden’s Electoral Votes in Congress.
Speaking publicly for the first time since Trump’s indictment, Pence told reporters he had hoped it wouldn’t come to a charge.
“Sadly, the president was surrounded by a group of crackpot lawyers that kept telling him what his itching ears wanted to hear,” said Pence.
Of the 78 charges across three criminal cases, 44 are federal and 34 state charges, all felonies, in three jurisdictions. Trump has denied wrongdoing in every case.
However, Trump’s legal woes have done little to damage his status as a Republican front-runner. A New York Times/Siena College poll between July 23-27 showed a landslide lead of 37 percentage points over Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, his closest competitor in the Republican primary.
Trump’s best defense against these mostly politicized prosecutions may be winning the White House in 2024.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
Is the month of June not enough? Now, the LGBTQ+ group wants the entire summer.
Will you put your foot down?
Watch Amanda explain the controversy below:
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – First, let’s be clear. I was at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, as a security contractor for a foreign TV news crew. I witnessed the chaos firsthand and was not happy about it.
I strongly condemned those who violently rioted there in an article the very next day.
In my piece, I even said they should go to jail, just like any other violent rioters.
And they should. But Joe Biden’s DoJ isn’t content with ‘hard time’ for some of these rioters. They want a much longer time.
To also be clear, at the Capitol that day I saw tens of thousands of peaceful protesters before the riot. And saw many ‘rioters’ who weren’t violent.
Meanwhile, I have written about how many peaceful Jan. 6 protesters have been persecuted unfairly, and how harshly many violent rioters have been treated compared to equally violent Black Lives Matter (BLM) rioters.
Some of it is due to the Biden Department of Justice (DoJ) being hyper-political and overzealous, and part of it is the fact that these folks are getting tried and sentenced in the ‘People’s Republic of DC.’
When I first read of the case of Stewart Rhodes, head of the Oath Keepers, I thought he was one of the few who should get serious jail time. He and his gang were part of an organized, violent cadre that went to the Capitol to create violent chaos.
This is why they were charged and convicted of ‘seditious conspiracy’ – the only ones to be found guilty of that serious charge.
But when I heard he had gotten 18 years, I was floored. Child molesters get less time. Repeat violent offenders get less time. Even convicted spies sometimes get less time.
Eighteen years is a lot of time.
Even so, federal prosecutors are not satisfied with the severity of the jail terms delivered by the federal judge overseeing the case.
In the case of Rhodes, they wanted 25 years.
U.S. District Court Judge, and Barack Obama appointee, Amit Mehta sentenced Rhodes, and his colleagues, harshly due what he characterized as a dangerous criminal conspiracy aimed at violently derailing the transfer of presidential power.
But even if you believe these knuckleheads were intent on blocking the certification of the Electoral College vote, their chances of ‘derailing the transfer of presidential power’ two weeks later, on Jan 20, were little to none.
This is why Mehta’s sentences, while harsh, were still less than the prison terms prosecutors recommended and years below an agreed-upon “guidelines range” based upon their charges.
Of the others convicted of seditious conspiracy, Florida Oath Keeper leader Kelly Meggs received a 12-year term instead of the 21 DOJ wanted. Roberto Minuta of New York was sentenced to 4.5 years instead of 17. Joseph Hackett of Florida got a 3.5-year sentence; DOJ sought 12 years.
Ed Vallejo of Arizona was sentenced to 3-years, while DOJ wanted 17. And David Moerschel of Florida was sentenced to three years instead of the 10 DoJ wanted.
All of these are significant sentences in federal prison. A few might be deserved, but Biden’s DoJ isn’t happy with that. They want these folks to suffer even more.
If only DoJ was that zealous with other political crimes, and criminals, Hunter Biden might actually be in jail.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller and his wife, Katie Miller, have welcomed their fourth child, adding another member to one of the most prominent families in the Trump administration.
While details surrounding the birth have remained private, congratulations quickly poured in from friends, colleagues, and supporters celebrating the newest addition to the Miller family.
With four children now keeping the household busy, Miller may find that negotiating Capitol Hill is easier than negotiating bedtime.
The news also comes during what seems to be an ongoing White House baby boom.
Just last month, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt welcomed her second child, daughter Viviana “Vivi” Riccio, with husband Nicholas Riccio. Leavitt announced the joyful arrival on social media, sharing that her family’s hearts had “instantly exploded with love” after welcoming their baby girl.
Leavitt’s son, Niko, was promoted to big brother, while the youngest press secretary in American history has temporarily stepped away from the briefing room to enjoy life in the newborn bubble.
Now, the Miller family is celebrating a similar milestone.
For all the attention Washington places on politics, moments like these offer a reminder that many of the administration’s most recognizable faces are also parents juggling diapers, school schedules, and family responsibilities alongside their public duties.
In fact, supporters have increasingly noted that President Trump’s team includes a number of young families raising children while serving in high-pressure government roles. Whether it’s Leavitt balancing motherhood and press briefings or the Millers welcoming their fourth child, family life remains a central part of the Trump administration’s story.
As the Miller family settles into life with its newest member, supporters across the country are sending their congratulations and best wishes.
From all of us, congratulations to Stephen and Katie Miller on their newest blessing.
The Supreme Court just dealt a crippling blow to Democrats’ radical agenda for America. It’s about time.
Watch Amanda explain the situation below:
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – Until now, only billionaires could afford to enter sub-orbital space. And it needed to be by high-powered rocket (think Jeff Bezos in his Blue Origin, or Richard Branson in his Virgin Galactic).
Star Trek actor William Shatner also did a flight on a Blue Origin’s rocket.
But now you too can see the earth from 20 miles high. It will cost you just over $120,000 and it’s by a high-altitude balloon.
And, no, it’s not aboard a Chinese spy balloon. These will be private companies running the trips.
The billionaires in rockets still have one treat we can’t get – they can briefly experience weightlessness. They also go twice as high.
Space officially starts at the Karman line, 62 miles above the earth’s surface. But for most people there won’t be that much of a difference.
And at half the price, no training required, and a much softer, smoother ride, these edge-of-space balloons will be far more accessible and may become popular among the slightly less rich.
And unlike the rockets, these balloons will give you a much longer ride, with luxury amenities, food, and drink.
There now appears at least two companies on the verge of launching these space balloon trips. One is American and the other is French.
Both seem to avoid mention of the 1937 Hindenburg hydrogen-filled dirigible disaster.
The French company Zephalto with its Celeste balloon will provide Michelin-starred fine dining. It is partnered with France’s national space agency.
These balloons filled with helium or hydrogen will depart from France with two pilots on board and six passengers and rise 15.5 miles into the stratosphere.
Once at peak altitude, the balloon, carrying a pressurized capsule, will stay aloft for three hours, giving guests a chance to take in views previously seen only by astronauts. While in the air, passengers will be served high-end French food and wines.
These near-space rides will start at €120,000 ($132,000) per person in 2025, Bloomberg reports.
The other option will be Florida-based Space Perspective, which is testing its own passenger balloon, designed to reach the edge of space.
Eight civilians and a pilot will be able to comfortably travel up 100,000 feet (19 miles) to near space in a reusable pressurized capsule carried by a gigantic hydrogen-filled balloon called Spacecraft Neptune – because Neptune’s atmosphere is predominantly hydrogen.
The company operates out of leased facilities at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center, but plans to expand to Alaska and Hawaii, and then possibly to other countries around the world.
Flight will cost about $125,000 per person. And it plans to launch a year earlier than the Celeste.
Neptune’s ride will be similar to the Zephalto balloons, ascending at a sedate 12.5 miles per hour. It will give passengers two full hours to observe 360° views of Earth rotating beneath them and space above.
The overall ride will last six hours – two hours to ascend, two hours to float along the stratosphere, and two hours to descend into the Atlantic Ocean, where a recovery ship will be waiting.
The capsule comes complete with luxury seating, refreshments, a restroom, and Wi-Fi (so you can post to Instagram or live stream on Facebook as you fly – because – of course). The company plans to offer flights for weddings, corporate events, and scientific excursions.
Its flights are scheduled to begin in 2024, but the first batch of 600 tickets is already sold out.
Bon voyage. No smoking aboard.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – The massive protests against the communist Chinese dictatorship, and its draconian anti-COVID repression continues.
And so does the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) crackdown.
As these Chinese ‘freedom protests’ grow and spread, hypocritical Western leaders, who until recently pursued their own, less harsh, COVID crackdowns and vaccine mandates, are showing their support.
Among them, is Joe Biden.
A Monday White House statement in response to anti-lockdown demonstrations that swept through major Chinese cities reads:
We think it’s going to be very difficult for the People’s Republic of China to be able to contain this virus through their zero COVID strategy. We’ve long said everyone has a right to peacefully protest, here in the United States and around the world. This includes the PRC.
Sadly, while he could be far more aggressive in his response to China’s COVID repression, Biden was doing just the opposite with earlier Canadian and American COVID crackdown protests.
Justin Trudeau’s authoritarian overkill in response to Canadian truckers was particularly egregious.
An unquestionably authoritarian move, it received criticism from the left, right, and center.
The leftist Canadian Civil Liberties Association called Trudeau’s actions “unnecessary, unjustifiable and unconstitutional.”
Reason Magazine’s J.D. Tuccille said at the time that Trudeau had a “bad case of China-envy.”
Yet, Biden wholeheartedly backed Trudeau’s repression.
As Reason explains:
The Biden administration urged the Canadian government to use whatever means it had to reopen border crossings barricaded by the so-called “Freedom convoy” and get a handle on the protests.
That’s according to revelations of an ongoing Canadian inquiry into Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s unprecedented invocation of Canada’s Emergencies Act.
Why was Biden so gung-ho about Trudeau’s crushing of the peaceful trucker freedom protests?
Reason argues that in part:
Biden embraced an expansive view of his executive powers to effectively mandate vaccines for millions of Americans. That contributed to his support for the suppression of Canadian anti-mandate demonstrations.
REASON added: “The only people who seem to support Trudeau’s use of emergency powers against peaceful protestors are the prime minister himself—and the Biden White House.”
And Biden’s strong backing of Trudeau’s repression makes his current defense of China’s protests all the more laughable.
It also erodes his moral authority to lecture the Chinese government now on the right of the people to peaceful protest.
As Reason concludes: “It’s also a lesson in how restrictions on freedom in one country can damage it everywhere.”
When America allows the crushing of political dissent at home and promotes repression by its liberal northern neighbor, it not only hurts us, it fuels more repression among our enemies.
This only helps authoritarianism grow globally.
Hunter Biden is openly acknowledging what critics have argued for months: when it comes to his father’s sweeping pardon, he is anything but objective.
“I’m completely biased as it relates to what my dad did for me. I fully understand how uniquely situated I am in being privileged enough to have received a pardon from my father,” Hunter said in an interview published by liberal outlet MediasTouch.
The admission revives scrutiny over former President Joe Biden’s dramatic reversal on the issue. After repeatedly insisting he would not grant clemency to his son, Biden ultimately issued a sweeping pardon—undercutting Democrats’ long-standing “no one is above the law” message as Hunter faced serious federal charges.
Despite conceding his own bias, Hunter declined to weigh in on potential reforms to the presidential pardon system. Instead, he pivoted to attacking former President Donald Trump’s use of the same authority, pointing to the more than 1,000 individuals pardoned in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol protest.
Hunter Biden was granted an unusually broad pardon covering any offense he “has committed or may have committed” between Jan. 1, 2014, and Dec. 1, 2024—a scope that drew bipartisan criticism.
“I was filled with gratitude,” he said of his father’s decision.
The legal backdrop is significant. In September 2024, Hunter pleaded guilty to nine federal tax charges tied to a scheme that evaded more than $1.4 million in taxes. Months earlier, he was convicted in Delaware for lying about his drug use on a federal firearm purchase form.
Still, Hunter sought to shift the focus toward Trump and his family, saying, “I don’t think that the founders ever imagined Donald Trump. I don’t think they ever imagined the Trump family.”
He also attempted to contrast pardon totals: “I don’t think people understand is that, in the first year, I think—I don’t know the exact number—I think my dad gave 80 or so pardons over a four-year period of time. I think that that’s about the number.”
He added, “Donald Trump has given over 1,500 pardons in the first year alone. But I’m obviously—I’m not the one to be, I don’t think, fairly or unbiasedly talking about the presidential pardon vote.”
Trump, notably, did not pardon any of his children during his presidency, though he did grant clemency in 2020 to Charles Kushner, the father of his son-in-law.
The White House defended Trump’s record, with spokeswoman Abigail Jackson saying he has used his authority to pardon individuals who were victims of what she described as a “weaponized justice system.”
Jackson also criticized Biden’s final actions in office, arguing that “the only pardons anyone should be critical of are from President Autopen,” citing clemency for violent offenders and “proactive pardons he ‘signed’ for his family members like Hunter on his way out the door.”
In addition to Hunter, Biden issued pardons to several relatives, including his brother James, sister-in-law Sara, sister Valerie, and brother Francis—moves he framed as necessary protection against political retaliation.
READ NEXT: Congresswoman Resigns In Stunning Last-Minute Exit
In a controversial decision that critics say undermines basic electoral integrity, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly issued a preliminary injunction Thursday blocking the Trump administration from implementing key provisions of its election reform order — including a requirement that individuals provide proof of citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections.
The Trump administration’s order, signed in March, sought to address the widespread public concern over election security by aligning U.S. registration standards with those used by many developed nations — where proof of citizenship is a basic requirement to cast a vote. Yet, in her ruling, Judge Kollar-Kotelly sided with Democratic operatives and partisan groups, granting their request to halt implementation of what should be a commonsense safeguard.
It’s already a felony for noncitizens to vote in federal elections. So why oppose a mechanism to verify that voters are, in fact, eligible citizens? The administration’s proposed policy simply sought to enforce existing law, not change it. But for activists and partisan lawyers, that’s apparently too much.
Critics of the ruling argue that it demonstrates a disturbing disconnect between legal theory and electoral reality. While the plaintiffs claimed the executive order infringes on the “Elections Clause” of the Constitution — which delegates much of the authority over elections to the states — the Trump order targeted the federal voter registration form, which is a product of federal law and administered by a federal agency.
Among the more absurd arguments presented during the case was the suggestion that requiring proof of citizenship would complicate voter registration drives at grocery stores and public venues. In other words, ensuring that only citizens vote is too inconvenient for activists looking to register voters en masse.
But this framing reveals the central issue: voter registration is being treated like a political campaign tactic, not a civic responsibility. If accuracy and integrity are seen as barriers to convenience, something is deeply wrong with the system.
If the courts won’t even allow the federal form to be updated to reflect current law, critics argue, how can Americans have confidence that elections are fair and secure?
Ironically, while liberal groups celebrate the decision as a “victory for voters,” many Americans see it as a victory for loopholes and ambiguity. The same people who insist elections are sacred and democracy is under threat are now openly opposing the most basic eligibility checks used around the world.
Meanwhile, Trump’s other proposed reforms — including tighter mail ballot deadlines and review of voter rolls against immigration databases — were allowed to stand. But with the citizenship requirement blocked, many worry that the core vulnerability in the system remains unaddressed.
When noncitizens can easily register to vote — intentionally or accidentally — and the federal government is barred from checking, who exactly benefits?
This article originally appeared on American Liberty News. The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk. It is republished with permission.
READ NEXT: President Trump Signs Executive Order Requiring Proof Of Citizenship To Vote In Federal Elections
