Opinion

Home Opinion Page 39

On Twitter Show, Tucker Carlson Blames Ukraine for Attack on Dam

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

ANALYSIS – In his Twitter Spaces debut Tuesday night, called “Tucker on Twitter,” former Fox News host Tucker Carlson immediately accused Ukraine of being responsible for the catastrophic attack on the Nova Kakhovka dam in Southern Ukraine.

And he may be right.

Ukraine and Russia have routinely accused each other of shelling the dam, the hydroelectric station and the nearby Zaporizhia nuclear power plant.

Both sides have blamed the other for the attack, in what appears to be a war crime. Kyiv blamed Moscow for the “terrorist attack,” but the Kremlin claimed that Ukraine had struck the dam to impact Russian-controlled Crimea’s water supplies.

As Newsweek reported, that is part of Tucker’s claim, too.

And, despite his spotty track record on speculation, in this case, he may be right. Or at least, the assumption that Russia is always the culprit is no longer valid.

Based on recent reporting, which I wrote about here, Ukraine may, in fact, have been responsible for the serious sabotage of the Nord Stream undersea gas pipelines in September 2022, which was long blamed on Russia.

This makes the always-blame Russia crowd look less credible. But that doesn’t mean Tucker’s always-blame-everyone-except-Russia approach is any better.

While on Fox, Tucker repeatedly blamed the United States and Joe Biden for being behind the Nord Stream attack.

On Feb. 24 he said: “So the Biden administration committed the single largest most profound act of industrial terrorism of sabotaging history. They blew up the Nord Stream pipeline …”

And that has always been a stretch. Instead, The Post reporting today reinforces my earlier conclusion that it is “likely, the U.S. was aware but turned a blind eye.”

Thus, as far as we can tell, Biden knew about it beforehand but was unwilling or unable to do anything about it.

Tucker’s claims aren’t helped when he spouts pro-Russian talking points in his video, such as:

The Kakhovka dam was effectively Russian. It was built by the Russian government. It currently sits in Russian- controlled territory. The dam’s reservoir supplies water to Crimea, which has been for the last 240 years home of the Russian Black Sea Fleet.

Firstly, the ‘Soviets’ built the dam during the USSR, not the ‘Russians,’ and the USSR no longer exists. Secondly, it doesn’t matter how long Russia’s Black Sea Fleet was based in Crimea; it belongs to Ukraine because that’s what happened when the USSR dissolved in 1991 and Ukraine became independent.

Tucker’s Trumpian personal insults, like describing Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, as a “sweaty and rat-like comedian-turned-oligarch,” probably don’t help his credibility much either.

Tucker is on firmer ground when he argues that: “Blowing up the dam may be bad for Ukraine, but it hurts Russia more, and for precisely that reason, the Ukrainian government has considered destroying it.”

Especially when he cites a December report from The Washington Post in which a Ukrainian general spoke of using U.S.-made HIMARS launchers to “test strike” on the Kakhovka dam.

So, what are the facts?

The dam spanning the Dnipro River was breached on Tuesday, flooding swaths of territory and threatening crucial water supplies to Europe’s largest nuclear power plant.

At least 42,000 people and 1,500 square miles of land are at risk from the flooding caused by the destruction of the dam, likely slowing any potential Ukrainian military advance in the Dnipro River delta.

Much of the Dnipro River delta will become inaccessible for land operations, raising suspicions that Russia deliberately sabotaged the dam to prevent an expected Ukrainian counteroffensive.

However, the flooding has disproportionately affected the Russian-occupied side of the river.

The Kakhovka reservoir does supply Russian-occupied Kherson Oblast and the Crimea peninsula with fresh water.

Zelensky has said that the only way to destroy the dam is through mining and explosives and emphasized that Russian forces have now occupied the dam for over a year.

In a statement, Ukraine’s Southern Operational Command said, “Russian occupation troops blew up the dam” at Nova Kakhovka in the Kherson region.

Blaming “Russian terrorists” for the attack, Zelensky said on Twitter that “the destruction of the Kakhovka hydroelectric power plant dam only confirms for the whole world that they must be expelled from every corner of Ukrainian land.”

In the end, Tucker may be right. Ukraine could have been behind the attack. 

But he is far more credible when he is less bombastic and emphatic with his theories. Such as when he states:

So really, once the facts start coming in, it becomes much less of a mystery what might have happened to the dam, and a fair person would conclude that the Ukrainians probably blew it up, just as you would assume they blew up Nord Stream, the Russian natural gas pipeline last fall.

Tucker ended his new Twitter show by promising to be back with “much more, very soon.” I’m looking forward to it.

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

Feds Admit Dozens of Undercover Agents Joined Protesters at Capitol on Jan 6

6
Elvert Barnes, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

ANALYSIS – Federal and local law enforcement reportedly had at least 40 confidential informants, or CIs, (also known by federal agencies as Confidential Human Source – CHS) embedded with protestors and rioters at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.

This, according to the attorney for one of the Jan 6 defendants, Dominic Pezzola.

A member of the nationalist Proud Boys group, Pezzola is facing charges in federal court for allegedly conspiring to oppose the Jan. 2021 transfer of presidential power and related charges by interfering with Congress’ certification of the Electoral College vote.

His attorney says federal prosecutors kept this critical evidence secret and belatedly admitted this bombshell just recently.

I wrote about this issue in March when a video was released that showed undercover DC Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) officers inciting the rioters to storm the Capitol. Many more videos are still sealed by the courts and kept from the public.

As the attorney’s filing noted:

Some of these undercover Metro officers marched with the Proud Boy[s] march. And some appear to have played roles of instigators, in that they are seen on body-worn videos chanting “Go! Go!,” “Stop the Steal!,” and “Whose house? Our house!” on Jan. 6.  Others generally followed demonstrators toward the Capitol.

 
While that video, part of which was posted on Rumble, shows three members of the MPD’s Electronic Surveillance Unit (ESU) acting as protesters and inciting the crowd, new information reveals that MPD and the feds may have had dozens of undercover informants there that day.

The Daily Caller reports that Pezzola’s lawyer, Roger Roots, said that federal prosecutors admitted Tuesday that eight FBI confidential human sources were embedded among the Proud Boys on Jan. 6. In his Wednesday court filing, Root said that Homeland Security Investigations (HIS) , part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), appears to have had some 19 informants active at the time.

That means that the largest number of federal CHSs on Jan. 6 didn’t even belong to the FBI, but instead were from DHS.

Roots added that, in addition to all these federal CIs, at least 13 undercover plain-clothes DC Metro Police agents worked among Jan. 6 defendants that day (one more than originally revealed). 

That’s a lot of local police undercover officers and federal confidential informants for one protest. And who knows how many more there may have been in other capacities.

In his filing, Roots argues that:

Pezzola submits that the entire defense in this trial, including opening,cross, and defense cases, would have been different, and much more aggressive, if defense counsel had known of the scope and scale of undercover government operations on Jan. 6. Prosecutors made arguments contrary to information they possessed and withheld; and defense counsel could have lodged different cross-examination and direct examination questions if they had known of these materials.

Roots concludes by noting that the “United States is refusing to provide information which obviously has a high likelihood of being exculpatory.”

He adds that defendants are entitled to this information. “ACCORDINGLY, Pezzola asks for an order compelling the United States to provide the names, identities, and reports of all HSI confidential informants operating at or near the Capitol or around the Proud Boys on January 6, 2021.”

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

Outrage Grows After Woke Navy Launched Drag Queen ‘Recruiter’

6
Daniel Ramirez from Honolulu, USA, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

ANALYSIS – America’s Navy is sinking fast – last year, the world’s premier maritime combat service launched, then apparently scuttled, a new recruiting campaign led by an active-duty ‘non-binary’ sailor drag queen.

And our nation’s enemies are likely quaking in their boots at the promise of even more drag queens being recruited to fight on the front lines by our armed forces.

The Navy’s appointment of a gay cross-dresser as its first ‘digital ambassador,’ while struggling with recruitment, has sparked outrage, disbelief and mockery of the Navy and the entire Department of Defense.

A Navy spokesperson told Fox News that the now defunct program was “designed to explore the digital environment to reach a wide range of potential candidates” as the Navy battles “the most challenging recruiting environment it has faced since the start of the all-volunteer force.”

Yeoman 2nd Class Joshua Kelley, whose stage name is Harpy Daniels, has a large following on TikTok (of course). He announced his role in November but has only recently been discovered by mainstream news sources.

(NOTE: I don’t use preferred pronouns. He is either a ‘he’ or she is a ‘she,’ regardless of how they ‘identify.’ And ‘they’ is only used to refer to two or more individuals.)

Kelley calls himself an ‘advocate’ for those who ‘were oppressed for years in the service.’

Many have compared him to Dylan Mulvaney, the biologically male trans activist whose association with Bud Light sparked a PR crisis for the brand and sent sales plummeting.

Rep. Jim Banks, a Republican from Indiana, tweeted that “Biden DoD’s [Department of Defense] recruitment is as good as Bud Light’s marketing.”

Jesse Watters said on his Fox News show on Wednesday: “What’s wrong with the Navy? They looked at Bud Light and said: ‘Hold my beer?’ Harpy is the Navy’s Dylan. Dylan killed Bud Light sales. What do you think Harpy’s going to do to recruitment?”

Kelley is not the Navy’s only digital ambassador (he is one of five). The Navy says that the ‘digital ambassador’ was a pilot program that ended in March 2023.

According to surveys, only 13 percent of 18-29-year-olds in the U.S. are ‘highly willing’ to join the Navy, while 25 percent are ‘somewhat willing.’ Critics like me can’t see how a man made up to look like a caricature of a woman will help convince more of our youth to serve in a warfighting role.

Unless the plan is to recruit even more cross-dressing young men with possible gender dysphoria to serve aboard warships, planes and tanks.

Robert J. O’Neill, a decorated combat veteran who served as a member of SEAL Team Six, and was on the raid that killed Osama bin Laden, said on Twitter he “can’t believe [he] fought for this bulls**t.”

“Alright. The U.S. Navy is now using an enlisted sailor Drag Queen as a recruiter,” he tweeted. “I’m done. China is going to destroy us.”

His tweet quickly gained 1.1 million views and thousands of likes and retweets. 

“Not this Navy veteran. I’m ashamed of the Navy,” wrote another veteran. “It’s an insult to every veteran. The army kept making me go to trans EO-type classes before I retired. Nope. Didn’t go.”

Another veteran responded: “As a Navy veteran, I am ashamed on behalf of the US Navy. I hope that goes over as well as Bud Light did.”

But another person – who can’t distinguish between freedom of expression in the civilian world and pushing a bizarre, fringe sexual agenda in our armed forces – mockingly commented:

“Local man angry he fought for freedom of expression.”

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

Clueless Deputy Chief of Space Force Takes Sides in ‘Woke Wars’

4
PETERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Colo. -- Col. DeAnna Burt, 50th Space Wing commander, speaks to Airmen and civilians attending the Women's Leadership Symposium at the Peterson Club on Tuesday, Mar. 7th, 2017. Attendees came from a variety of bases, including Buckley, Peterson, Schriever, Vandenberg and Cheyenne Mountain. (U.S. Air Force photo/Senior Airman Laura Turner)

ANALYSIS – You would think that a senior U.S. military officer would finally have figured out that they should stay out of the ‘woke wars’ 

Unfortunately, Lt. Gen. DeAnna Burt, deputy chief of space operations at the U.S. Space Force (USSF), appears to have not gotten the memo.

Even as the Pentagon cracks down on ridiculous Drag Queen shows, and the Congress pushes to eliminate woke policies like taxpayer-funded abortion travel, and ‘diversity’ programs that are more divisive than inclusive, Burt decided now was the time to rail against what she called “anti-LGBTQ+ laws” at the state level.

She made her speech at a Pentagon ‘Pride’ event last week.

Fox News reported that she “claimed that such laws affect her hiring and promotion decisions, sometimes leading her to choose a “less qualified” candidate because of a preferred candidate’s ‘personal circumstances.’”

Yes. She said that.

Fox said that Burt told those attending the event:

Transformational cultural change requires leadership from the top, and we do not have time to wait. Since January of this year, more than 400 anti-LGBTQ+ laws have been introduced at the state level. That number is rising and demonstrates a trend that could be dangerous for service members, their families, and the readiness of the force as a whole. 

Fox News explained:

The “anti-LGBTQ+ laws” Burt mentioned appeared to be referencing the legislation passed by more than 20 states restricting or banning gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors, as well as numerous bills limiting the amount of time in which an abortion can be performed during a pregnancy.

Most of these GOP-led state laws are perfectly reasonable, and designed to protect unborn children, and their mothers, as well as protect kids being pushed into irreversible transgender medical procedures.

They are also totally outside her purview, and democratically established by state legislatures.

But to Burt, they are so dangerous she prefers to hire less qualified candidates due to their ‘personal circumstances,’ rather than subject them to these states’ laws. 

Fox News quoted her as saying:

When I look at potential candidates, say, for squadron command, I strive to match the right person to the right job. I consider their job performance and relevant experience first. However, I also look at their personal circumstances, and their family is also an important factor. 

If the good match for a job does not feel safe being themselves and performing at their highest potential at a given location, or if their family could be denied critical health care due to the laws in that state, I am compelled to consider a different candidate, and, perhaps, less qualified. 

Which part of ‘don’t get into partisan politics or the culture wars’ doesn’t she understand. And hiring less qualified people for a job based on ‘personal circumstances’ sounds like discrimination to me. 

Not to mention horrible leadership, dangerous to national security, and bad for America.

But it’s not just one senior leader at USSF. According to leaked emails, last month, two Navy officials derided critics of the service’s promotion of LGBTQ+ Pride as “bigots” and “a—holes.”

These two ‘Pride Pushers’ reportedly schemed on how to best post a “rainbow wingtip graphic” for LGBTQ+ Pride Month on the Navy social media accounts.

As I wrote about then, the Navy only had one Pride image up on social media for less than a day on June 1st, the start of ‘Pride Month,’ before removing it.

None of the other services posted Pride imagery this year, a stark difference from last year when ‘Pride Month’ began.

This is hopefully part of a broader Pentagon policy to pull out of the ‘woke wars’ and keep partisan, ideological, racial, and sexual politics out of our military.

I noted earlier: “Only the Coast Guard and the National Guard made posts for Pride Month, but neither service changed its profile pictures or header image. Hopefully, they will soon get the memo.”

Well, now I add – these navy officials and Lt. Gen. Burt should also get the memo, or even better, an invitation to a Congressional hearing to explain themselves.

It’s time to focus on real wars, not woke ones.

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

Army Special Ops Command Proudly Flies ‘Pride’ Flag

1
Marcha del orgullo en Paraná, Entre Ríos, Argentina. Noviembre de 2021 via Wikimedia commons

ANALYSIS – Please just stop! – Even as the U.S. armed services toned down their politically driven, identity and sexual politics pandering for Pride Month this year, it seems the commanding general of U.S. Army Special Operations Command (also known as ARSOC) didn’t get the memo.

Please note that ARSOC (or USASOC) includes some of our finest warriors, including the 75th Ranger Regiment, Army Special Forces (Green Berets) and 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment-Delta (or Delta Force – the Army’s equivalent of the Navy SEALs).

In what I consider an obscene post across multiple social media accounts, including Twitter, Instagram and Facebook, the commander of ARSOC, Lt. Gen. Jonathan P. Braga, either knowingly, or unknowingly, allowed his public affairs peons to celebrate Pride Month with the most bizarre leftist flag there is – as of now.

It’s the “intersex-inclusive Pride Progress” flag.

I say “as of now” because we have come a long way from a simple rainbow flag to represent gays. As I wrote earlier, the latest Pride flag, along with the leftist ideology that it’s based on, is constantly morphing.

It first added black and brown stripes to represent the Black Lives Matter (BLM) racial agenda. Then it added pink and baby blue for transgenderism, only to add purple and yellow for those who call themselves nonbinary.

And it is daily adding more elements and colors as the movement expands to include everything the left now advocates, even if it makes less sense each time.

The intersex symbol on this flag is the left’s latest add. It is a purple circle on a yellow background in the chevron on the left of the flag.

And it seems totally redundant.

Brietbart explains:

According to an article from Boston University, “intersex” is defined as “those whose bodies do not align with the gender binaries of males or females. This includes those with both genitals or other differences.” The colors yellow and purple are meant to be seen as “nonbinary colors,” the article stated.

The flag also included light blue, pink, and white, which, according to the article, represent, respectively, boys, girls, and “those who are transitioning, have no gender, or are gender neutral.”

This latest ‘intersex-inclusive Pride Progress’ flag is not only bizarre and visually hideous, but it also represents an extreme left-wing political and sexual ideology that divides us instead of uniting us.

The ARSOC post also made the oft-repeated claim that: “Throughout American history, LGBTQ+ members have not only fought for the right to serve openly, but have also fought in every major war and conflict.”

I tweeted my own reply to that, asking for the names of just a couple of specific LGBT individuals from every conflict and noted that I was especially interested in those that were T.

I doubt too many intersex transgenders fought at Yorktown or Gettysburg. Or even WWII or Korea.

Breitbart also posted some comments to the ARSOC post that pointed out we already have one all-inclusive flag:

A former Green Beret posted in response: “And you jackasses wonder why the military as a whole can’t even meet its recruiting goals? There’s only one flag you should be proud of, the one we fought under and many of our brothers and sisters died under.”

It continued:

Sara Carter, Fox News Contributor and host of the Sara Carter Show, blasted the command’s posts, tweeting:

.@USASOCNews
My husband was in Special Operations Command for more than 16 years and continued to serve beyond – but he fought for the American flag not the LGBTQ flag

See, here’s the problem – The American flag represents all Americans and the rights we cherish – we don’t need the bizarre multi-colored flag to appreciate freedom my husband and so many others (gay or not) risked their lives for or lost their lives for – your priorities are so F’ked up

Indeed, we should only fly one flag – the American flag. It’s the one we fight for, and it includes all of us.

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

Did Trump Threaten to Execute Gen. Mark Milley for Treason?

4
Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III, Army Gen. Mark A. Milley, chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff; and Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) Michael J. McCord provide testimony at a Senate Armed Services Committee budget hearing, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C., March 28, 2023. (DoD photo by Chad J. McNeeley)

ANALYSIS – Words matter. In a post on his Truth Social platform last Friday, former President Donald Trump suggested that outgoing Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley deserved to be executed after speaking with China’s top general during Trump’s final months in office. 

Trump said Milley’s “treasonous act” was “so egregious that, in times gone by, the punishment would have been DEATH!”

Clearly, Trump wasn’t threatening to do so but saying that Milley’s actions could have been punished by death in a prior era.

I condemned Milley’s actions at the time because they seemed to give the Chinese Communist regime a promise that they would be given a warning prior to any attack under Trump.

While Milley claims his actions were a normal part of his duties, I disagree. 

They appeared to be more a normal part of the mission that he took upon himself, which was to counter Trump when Milley believed the president had crossed some line only Milley could see.

Some argue that Milley’s actions were not only disloyal to the president but also borderline ‘treasonous.’

Milley contends that he was behaving appropriately to avert an accidental war. He responded to Trump’s comments on CBS:

He also assured viewers that he had adequate safety measures for himself and his family.

The two backchannel calls to China’s top general, Li Zuocheng, that Milley made, and at the center of all this, were revealed in the 2021 book “Peril.”  

As CNN reported:

In October 2020, as intelligence suggested China believed the US was going to attack them, Milley sought to calm Li by reassuring him that the US was not considering a strike, according to the book. Milley called again two days after the January 6 riot at the US Capitol to tell Li that the US is “100 percent steady” even though “things may look unsteady.”

How much of this reporting in the book was accurate, is hard to say. But Trump sees things very differently. 

Trump said that Milley “turned out to be a Woke train wreck who, if the Fake News reporting is correct, was actually dealing with China to give them a heads up on the thinking of the President of the United States.”

And Trump may be right. For Milley to do that could be seen as highly inappropriate, if not exactly ‘treasonous.’

Still, Trump, a former president, and current front-runner for the Republican nomination for president, is way out of line. No American political leader should be using that kind of language against any American military official or political leader.

In today’s volatile climate, it is extremely dangerous.

Yet few in the GOP will condemn Trump’s statements. Former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson is one of those willing to take aim at the Republican frontrunner. Politico quoted Hutchinson as saying:

To suggest that Gen. Milley should be executed is inexcusable and dangerous. While some will excuse this latest outrage as Trump just being Trump, the fact is that his statement endangers people and is an insult to those who serve in the military.

Perennial Trump critic, former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, had stronger words, calling Trump an “absolute child” for the “reprehensible” remarks. 

But it is part of a disturbing pattern by both sides to use dangerously inflammatory rhetoric at the highest levels against the other side.

Democrats raised the political temperature considerably against Trump, calling for, or at least condoning the calls for, his beheading and death on many occasions. 

The demonization of Trump by the left and Democrat Party was more than I had ever seen in over thirty years in and around U.S. politics. 

It was, and still is, outrageous.

But Trump isn’t helping things with his own dangerous rhetoric.

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

Amanda Head: Here’s How To Be An Informed Buyer

0

After Bud Light’s major misstep consumers are looking for ways to make sure their hard-earned dollars go toward companies and institutions that respect their values.

Watch Amanda explain the situation below:

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

Amanda Head: Fox News Viewers Down, MSNBC Up!

1

Viewers are leaving Fox News in droves…

Watch Amanda explain the situation below:

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

Amanda Head: Liberals and Their Lies on the 4th of July!

0

Liberals just can’t help themselves…

Watch Amanda explain the controversy below:

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

Amanda Head: A Loss For Zuckerberg is a Win for Humanity

4
Amanda Head screenshot

Boom!

A loss for liberal billionaire Mark Zuckerberg is a huge win for everyone else…

Watch Amanda explain the situation below:

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