Random

    Opinion

    Home Opinion Page 39

    Emails Reveal FBI Tried To Shut Off Trump Security Cameras During Documents Raid

    By
    Donny Ferguson
    -
    2
    Marine One lifts-off after returning President Donald J. Trump to Mar-a-Lago Friday, March 29, 2019, following his visit to the 143-mile Herbert Hoover Dike near Canal Point, Fla., that surrounds Lake Okeechobee. The visit was part of an infrastructure inspection of the dike, which is part of the Kissimmee-Okeechobee Everglades system, and reduces impacts of flooding for areas of south Florida. (Official White House Photo by Joyce N. Boghosian) [Photo Credit: The White House from Washington, DC, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons]

    A flurry of emails between Justice Department figures reveal the Federal Bureau of Investigation asked former President Donald Trump’s attorneys to shut off Mar-A-Lago’s security cameras to prevent any recording of agents searching for classified documents, fearful that Trump would release the footage to his supporters.

    The non-profit public interest law firm Judicial Watch reports it received 477 pages of records pages from the Justice Department revealing top officials within the National Security Division “discussing the political implications of Trump allowing CNN to use closed-circuit TV (CCTV) footage of the raid on his Mar-a-Lago home. The documents confirm that the Justice Department had asked that Mar-a-Lago CCTV be turned off before the raid.”

    The records were released to Judicial Watch in response to a September 2022 Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, filed after the Justice Department failed to respond to an August 2022 request for records about the August 8, 2022 Mar-a-Lago raid.

    An August 17, 2022, email exchange, with the subject “CNN – Mar-a-Lago CCTV Footage,” reveals officials discussing efforts to shut off Trump’s security cameras to prevent him releasing footage of any searches.

    “I just received a call from our case agents at FBI, and apparently the Bureau has been given a heads-up by CNN that CNN has CCTV [closed circuit television] footage from Mar-a-Lago (presumably of agents executing the search) that they may air as soon as tonight [Redacted],” writes an attorney, whose name is redacted, with the Justice Department’s Counterintelligence and Export Control Section of the National Security Division.

    “I have no further info on what, specifically, CNN has. But [redacted],” he or she adds.

    “CNN is saying FPOTUS [former president] is still weighing whether to release the footage,” Jay Bratt, chief of the Counterintelligence and Export Control Section adds.

    “Got a call from Evan [likely then-Trump attorney Evan Corcoran]. As Jay says, Trump team is still weighing the release. Per Evan, some say it will energize base, others say not a good look for FPOTUS to have it out there” writes Communications Advisor Luis Rossello.

    “CNN is working on a story that Jay requested Trump team to turn off the cameras and they refused,” Rossello continues.

    Justice Department official George Toscas replies, “We’re waiting to hear back from FBIHQ on their recommended approach.” 

    Bratt writes, “We did. This was in the call [redacted] and I had with Evan Corcoran before the search. It is standard for [redacted].” 

    At one point, Principal Deputy Associate Attorney General Marshall Miller forwards the email exchange to a personal email account of Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco.

    It is generally not recommended for government officials to use personal email addresses, which can evade public disclosure.

    Miller’s comment is entirely redacted, Judicial Watch reports, “to which a Justice Department National Security Division official, whose name is redacted, responds, ‘Kelsey/Luis: Will we also plan to communicate to CNN the law enforcement safety need to blur agent faces if footage ends up being released?’” 

    Anthony Coley, Director of the DOJ Public Affairs Office, replies, “Done.”

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

    Biden NSC Spokesman Drops Israeli War ‘Truth Bomb’ On Lefty Reporters

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    0

    ANALYSIS – As most of my readers know, I’m not a big fan of Joe Biden, or any of his lefty White House minions. This includes retired Rear Admiral John Kirby, the oftentimes Democrat hack, previously Pentagon press secretary, and currently coordinator for strategic communications at the National Security Council (NSC).

    Watching this former senior military officer try to spin ridiculous and dangerous Biden foreign and defense policies is often stomach churning.

    But, if nothing else, I try to be fair and honest, and can applaud my opponents when they occasionally get something right.

    And this time Kirby not only got things right, but he surprisingly dropped a major ‘truth bomb.’ And even Biden played a part.

    On Wednesday Biden correctly responded to a lefty reporter’s loaded question about Israel causing civilian casualties in Gaza by saying he can’t trust the civilian casualty numbers disseminated by the Gaza Ministry of Health, controlled by Hamas. They are, essentially, terrorist propaganda.

    In his response the elderly Biden referred to Hamas as “the Palestinians,” but it’s clear what who was talking about.

    “What they say to me is I have no notion that the Palestinians are telling the truth about how many people are killed. I’m sure innocents have been killed, and it’s the price of waging a war,” Biden said. 

    “But I have no confidence in the number that the Palestinians are using.”

    And that was spot on. The figures coming from Palestinian Hamas officials in Gaza are worse than worthless, they are lies.

    Biden’s accurate observation was followed on Thursday by a question from another lefty reporter asking Kirby if Biden would apologize for his remarks since they had angered the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), who called his comments “shocking and dehumanizing.”

    Referring to Biden’s remarks, the reporter asked Kirby:

    Don’t you think it is insensitive? There [is] very harsh criticism about it. For example, the Council of American-Islamic Relations said it was deeply disturbed and called on the president to apologize. Would the president apologize, and does he regret saying something like that?

    To provide some background here, we need to note that while CAIR pretends to be a Muslim human rights group, it often traffics in anti-Jewish rhetoric. 

    CAIR’s Executive Director has claimed that ‘Zionist organizations’ in the U.S. are “enemies of the Muslim community” and that “Zionist organizations make up the core of the Islamophobia network in the United States.” 

    He has also used the trope that pro-Israel groups have “corrupted” the U.S. government and that Israel doesn’t have a right to exist. It’s really just another front group for promoting Islamism and antisemitism in the U.S.

    So, it was refreshing to hear Kirby provide the biased reporter a firm and simple “no,” Biden won’t apologize.

    Kirby then dropped the major ‘truth bomb’ about the Israeli-Hamas conflict. As Blaze Media reported:

    “What’s harsh is the way Hamas is using people as human shields. What’s harsh is taking a couple of hundred hostages and leaving families anxious, waiting, and worrying to figure out where their loved ones are. What’s harsh is dropping in on a music festival and slaughtering a bunch of young people just trying to enjoy an afternoon,” he said.

    “That’s what’s harsh. And being honest about the fact that there have been civilian casualties — and that there likely will be more — is being honest, because that’s what war is. It’s brutal. It’s ugly. It’s messy,” he continued. “I’ve said that before. President also said that yesterday. Doesn’t mean we have to like it. And it doesn’t mean that we’re dismissing any one of those casualties — each and every one is a tragedy in its own right.”

    Kirby, moreover, revealed that the U.S. government is helping Israel minimize civilian casualties but highlighted how Hamas is making that difficult.

    “It would be helpful if Hamas would let [Gazan civilians] leave,” he pointed out. “We know that there are thousands waiting to leave Gaza writ large, and Hamas is preventing them from doing it. That is what is harsh.”

    BOOM! That truth bomb was a direct hit and must have caused some casualties among the leftist press corps. Well done, Admiral Kirby. Now can you tell the truth about Iran, the border, etc., etc.?

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

    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.

    Tucker Carlson Jan 6 Exposé – Partly True and Also Kinda Dumb

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    20
    Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    ANALYSIS – Tucker Carlson’s misguided attempt to use cherry-picked moments of the newly released video of Jan. 6 to argue that nothing bad happened at the Capitol that day, is horribly timed and very dumb. 

    As I wrote the day after I personally observed events at the Capitol that day, January 6 was neither a deadly coup, insurrection nor peaceful guided tours of the Capitol. 

    It was a mixture of some of those things, none of those things, and everything in between.

    And Tucker would have been far more effective, and credible had he used the video to show that the Left’s Jan. 6 narrative was incomplete, distorted, and totally one-sided, rather than trying to say it was totally false.

    Because the truth is that Jan 6 was like the story of the blind men and the elephant, each one grasping one part of the animal, like the leg, tail, or trunk, and describing the giant beast as something totally different.

    On Jan. 6 what began as a massive peaceful rally of tens of thousands of pro-Trump protesters, soon degraded when smaller elements (a few hundred) of the much larger peaceful crowd broke off and did conduct a violent attack on parts of the Capitol.

    Hundreds more just stupidly followed the initial ‘attack mob’ inside.

    In the first group, some had military training, used stack formations, and were very organized and intent on forcefully breaching the building. 

    While none were found with, or used firearms, during the riot, there was violence with sticks, flagpoles, and pepper spray.

    I called these violent rioters, thugs, and criminals.

    They were similar to the violent BLM rioters who had violently attacked police at the White House in the summer of 2020 or besieged the Portland Federal Courthouse for months.

    On Jan. 6 police officers were similarly attacked and beaten, and the Capitol was ultimately breached unlawfully.

    Inside, one non-violent protester, Ashley Babbitt, an Air Force security forces veteran, was shot by a Capitol Police Officer. Likely, unjustly. 

    She was the only person killed during the riot.

    All this occurred in the span of just a few hours.

    But the Capitol complex is massive, and what was happening violently on one end was not being replicated at other parts of the Capitol. 

    As much of the Tucker video showed truthfully, in many places and entrances, Capitol Police had allowed protesters inside, in some cases escorted them around. 

    In other cases, the police simply stood by as the ‘tourist’ protesters milled around and took selfies or acted stupidly.

    Still, ever since then, there has been a profound narrative battle pitting those fanatics on the right who said nothing at all happened and the fanatics on the left who claim Jan. 6 was worse than Pearl Harbor or 9/11, and an insurrection that risked the essence of American democracy. 

    Sadly, neither side is correct, but only the most extreme one-sided ‘insurrection’ narrative was put forward by the left and last Congress’ Democratic-run Jan. 6 committee, and repeated daily by the partisan, anti-Trump media.

    The insurrection narrative was pushed by cherry-picked videos and photos of the same short-lived Capitol violence from different views and angles, repeated in a nearly constant loop for the most distorted and dramatic effect possible.

    But now Tucker has done the same.

    As Politico reported:

    Capitol Police Chief Thomas Manger wrote in an internal message to officers that Carlson’s Monday night primetime program “conveniently cherry-picked from the calmer moments of our 41,000 hours of video” to incorrectly portray the violent assault as more akin to a peaceful protest. He added that Carlson’s “commentary fails to provide context about the chaos and violence that happened before or during these less tense moments.”

    And many Republican leaders agreed.

    The timing is also horrible.

    As Politico reported:

    “It’s definitely stupid to keep talking about this … So what is the purpose of continuing to bring it up unless you’re trying to feed Democrat narratives even further?” Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas) said in an interview, noting the videos didn’t show “anything we don’t already know.”

    “I don’t really have a problem with making it all public. But if your message is then to try and convince people that nothing bad happened, then it’s just gonna make us look silly.”

    So how should we view the events of the January 6 riot accurately and fairly?

    Probably the best description was provided by Rep. Kelly Armstrong (R-N.D.) when he said he has “a hard time with all of it.”

    He added that Jan. 6 “was not a peaceful protest. It was not an insurrection. It was a riot that should have never happened. And a lot of people share the blame for that. The truth is always messier than any narrative.”

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

    Growing Number of Americans Support War on Woke

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    5
    Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    ANALYSIS – The war against woke is raging across the nation. From school districts to corporations and even the Pentagon, conservative Republicans are on the front lines to get America to wake up to what woke really is. 

    And it’s not the dictionary definition of the term.

    As Florida Governor Ron DeSantis battles Disney over its woke policies, and both he and the Texas legislature dismantle neo-Marxist Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives statewide, liberals still try to focus on the textbook description of woke, as being ‘socially conscious’ rather than the radical concept it is.

    This, as a growing majority of Americans are supporting the war against woke, and saying that if you “go woke, you go broke.” Budweiser is certainly learning this lesson right now.

    Bud Light is facing a massive boycott over its partnership with transgender influencer (aka man who is trying to look like a woman) Dylan Mulvaney. And thankfully, it’s hurting the company.

    But it isn’t the only one – Target, Bed Bath & Beyond, and Miller Lite are also being hit by outrage over their woke advertising.

    Still, in a Newsweek piece, the writer, Aleks Phillips, makes every effort to focus on the dictionary definition of woke, even in a report about how their recent poll shows that Millennials favor the expression “go woke, go broke.” 

    Phillips writes:

    The term ‘woke’ is a colloquialism that has emerged in recent years. Its definition is to be “aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice),” according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary.

    That’s the thoroughly watered-down dictionary definition. More specifically woke is an adjective derived from African American Vernacular English (AAVE) meaning being “alert to racial prejudice and discrimination.”

    But that too is less than meets the eye.

    It’s a call to social justice activism. And social justice is a code for socialism.

    Even so, the Newsweek poll contradicts the popular narrative that millennials are the most socially conscious group who care most about so-called ‘social justice’ issues.

    The poll found that of those who were aware of the phrase “go woke, go broke,” an average of 71% of 25-44-year-olds agreed with the idea.

    That’s a big chunk of adult folks who don’t seem to like woke.

    Phillips later adds an earlier Newsweek reference where a clueless (and lefty) Kelly O’Keefe, founding partner of Brand Federation, said it was “really a minority on the right” that was “concerned about even the term ‘woke’.”

    “They’ve essentially weaponized the term ‘woke’—which has a dictionary definition that almost no one could disagree with: standing up for those who have been misrepresented, poorly represented etc.,” he added.

    But neither the leftist politicians and activists forcing the new wokeness, nor those suffering under the policies, see the term in such an innocuous manner.

    Being woke isn’t about simply being socially aware. Not by a long shot.

    It is a simple code word for a slew of policies based on a neo-Marxist ideology.

    These policies include pushing a radical transgender agenda on our children, racial preferences, and discrimination in favor of minorities, and against whites (in schools, government and businesses), and outright socialism under the guise of ‘equity.’ 

    To be clear – equity is the opposite of equality. It means the forceful creation of equal results rather than equality under the law, or equal opportunity. That is the textbook definition of socialism.

    And more Americans, including Millennials, are seeing through the ‘textbook definition” of woke charade, and calling it what it is – a dangerous ideology – especially damaging to your corporate bottom line.

    The outrage at woke brands like Bud Light has been sold by liberals as a reaction by a small minority of conservatives. But as noted earlier, the dramatic decline in Bud Light sales suggests that the boycott has widespread support.

    Newsweek‘s poll also suggests that the opposition to everything woke isn’t just a preserve of conservatives anymore, it’s an increasingly American thing.

    Phillips notes that:

    A majority of both those who voted for Donald Trump in 2020 and those who voted for Joe Biden agreed with the sentiment of “go woke, go broke,” it found, with 71 percent of Trump supporters agreeing and 62 percent of Biden supporters.

    So even a majority of liberal Biden supporters are coming around to see woke for the extremist ideology it is. And that’s not good for Democrats leaders who still seem hell-bent on pushing that radical agenda.

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

    Biden Doctor Ordered To Testify On President’s Mental Decline

    By
    Donny Ferguson
    -
    1
    Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    President Joe Biden’s White House physician, along with Biden’s top aides, have been ordered to testify to Congress on Biden’s mental decline and whether top decisions were made by Biden or by unelected figures.

    “As part of the investigation into the cover-up of President Joe Biden’s mental decline and potentially unauthorized use of autopen for sweeping pardons and other executive actions, House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY) today sent letters to President Biden’s physician and former White House aides demanding they appear for transcribed interviews,” the committee announced in a statement.

    “The cover-up of President Biden’s obvious mental decline is a historic scandal. The American people deserve to know when this decline began, how far it progressed, and who was making critical decisions on his behalf. Key executive actions signed by autopen, such as sweeping pardons for the Biden Crime Family, must be examined considering President Biden’s diminished capacity. Today, we are calling on President Biden’s physician and former White House advisors to participate in transcribed interviews so we can begin to uncover the truth. In the last Congress, the Biden White House blocked these individuals from providing testimony to the Oversight Committee as part of the effort to cover-up Biden’s declining health. Any continued obstruction will be met with swift and decisive action. The American people demand transparency and accountability now,” said Comer. 

    The committee reports:

    Last Congress, Chairman Comer subpoenaed three key White House aides – Annie Tomasini, Anthony Bernal, and Ashley Williams – who ran interference for President Biden and also requested a transcribed interview with his physician, Dr. Kevin O’Connor. 

    The Biden White House obstructed the Committee’s investigation and refused to make the aides available for depositions or interviews. Chairman Comer also subpoenaed the audio recordings related to Special Counsel Robert Hur’s investigation into President Biden’s mishandling of classified documents, but Attorney General Merrick Garland defied the subpoena. 

    According to a new book, Original Sin, one person familiar with the internal dynamic at the White House stated, “Five people were running the country, and Joe Biden was at best a senior member of the board.”  

    Comer reports he is continuing “the investigation into the cover-up of Biden’s mental decline and use of autopen for key decisions.”

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

    By
    Amanda Head
    -
    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.

    Latest ISIS Terror Leader Reportedly Killed – How Long Will Next One Last?

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    0
    Photo via Pixabay images

    ANALYSIS – A spokesman for the Islamist terror group Islamic State, or ISIS, has announced that their latest leader has been killed “in action.”

    His death has not yet been independently verified, and no one has claimed responsibility for the killing.

    Asked in Washington about Abu al-Hassan al-Hashimi al-Qurayshi‘s death, National Security Council spokesman John Kirby told The Associated Press: 

    “We certainly welcome the news of the death of another ISIS leader. I don’t have any additional operational details to provide at this time.”

    Qurashi refers to the tribe of Islam’s founder, the Prophet Muhammad, from whom ISIS leaders must claim descent.

    If the latest leader’s death is true, he would be the second ISIS leader killed this year, about 10 months after the death of the previous leader killed in a U.S. raid in northwest Syria in March.

    He would also be the third leader eliminated since the founder Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was killed by U.S. forces in Idlib, Syria in 2019.

    Their deaths came after the meteoric rise of ISIS in 2013-2014 following Barack Obama’s reckless withdrawal from Iraq in December 2011.

    Obama famously called ISIS the “JV team.”

    Meanwhile, some doubt the veracity of the claim that the latest ISIS leader has been killed.

    According to the Mirror, Hassan Hassan, co-author of the book “ISIS: Inside the Army of Terror,” urged caution about the news and says ISIS could have “easily” said “that person was killed and replaced with ‘Abu al-HussAIN al-Qurashi.’ Who could tell?”

    The Mirror reported:

    Writing on Twitter Mr Hassan continued: “Important to note that this is quite possibly a fake announcement.

    “Scenario 1 is that the ISIS leader was killed ‘accidentally’ during a raid or fighting without him being known to whoever killed him (the US, Iraqis, Kurds) so those did not know they killed the leader. That’d be unprecedented, but possible.

    “Also, jihadist groups have a long history of claiming leaders/commanders dead, just to get intelligence/security agencies off their back.”

    ISIS has been mostly defeated in Iraq and Syria, under relentless attacks during Trump’s administration, but sleeper cells still carry out attacks on both countries

    The ISIS threat has also been increasing recently, under Joe Biden, especially in Africa.

    Abu al-Hassan al-Hashimi al-Qurayshi was reportedly replaced by Abu al-Hussain al-Hussaini al-Qurashi as the despicable terror group’s new caliph.

    The Daily Mail reported:

    The [ISIS] spokesman did not provide details on the new leader, but said he was a ‘veteran’ jihadist and called on all groups loyal to IS to pledge their allegiance.

    Little else is known of the leader who is taking control of the beleaguered terror group whose influence over the Middle East has waned in recent years.

    Apparently, being chosen the ISIS leader, or caliph, brings with it a very short life span. 

    Let’s see how long this new leader lasts before being sent to enjoy his 72 virgins.

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

    Amanda Head: Obese Celebrity Celebrates Her Own Obesity

    By
    Amanda Head
    -
    0

    Hollywood has finally gone full tilt…

    Watch Amanda break down the latest woke controversy below:

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

    Stunner: CIA Approved and Promoted Biden Campaign Letter Falsely Claiming Russians Faked Hunter Laptop

    By
    Donny Ferguson
    -
    6
    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)

    In a stunning revelation, congressional investigators reveal the Central Intelligence Agency reviewed, approved and may have even recruited signers for an October 2020 public letter from 51 intelligence officials that falsely claimed damaging information against Democrat nominee Joe Biden had been “planted” the Russian government.

    Specifically, the letter, produced with the help of the CIA, claims Russian agents faked the contents of a laptop computer, abandoned at a Delaware computer shop by Biden’s middle-aged son Hunter.  Files, documents, and photograps on the laptop show Hunter Biden using drugs, frequenting prostitutes and engaged in shadowy business deals with foreign officials, which may also allegedly Joe Biden.

    As part of a plan to assist Biden’s campaign and defeat President Donald Trump, 51 intelligence officials signed their name to a public letter claiming, without evidence, the laptop was planted by the Russian government.

    That claim has since been proven to be a lie.


    It is now also revealed the CIA had a hand in its production.

    After an investigation, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Intelligence Committee Chairman Michael Turner (R-OH) have released a report revealing 

    the CIA’s “Prepublication Classification Review Board” or “PCRB” “reviewed and approved the statement before its release.”

    “Furthermore, evidence suggests that one CIA employee working at the PCRB may have shopped the letter to a former CIA officer who later agreed to add his name to the statement,” the lawmakers reveal in a statement.

    The House Judiciary Committee, in a statement, further reveals:

    On April 5, 2023, former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell testified before the Committees that Secretary Blinken, then serving as a senior Biden campaign advisor, was the impetus of the public statement. Documents also revealed that Morell rushed the statement through the PCRB process in order for Vice President Biden to have a “talking point” to use during the October 22, 2020, presidential debate.

    Additionally, evidence suggests that senior Biden campaign officials, including now Secretary of State Antony Blinken, now Deputy Press Secretary Andrew Bates, and now Counselor to the President Steve Ricchetti, took active measures to discredit the allegations about Hunter Biden by exploiting the national security credentials of former intelligence officials and coordinated efforts to disseminate the statement with members of the media. Morell’s testimony also exposed that the CIA’s PCRB reviewed and approved the statement before its release.

    According to a written statement provided to the Committees by former CIA official David Cariens, the CIA—or at least an employee of the CIA—may have helped in the effort to solicit signatures for the statement. Cariens explained that he spoke with the PCRB in October 2020 regarding the review of his memoir and during that call the CIA employee “asked” him if he would sign the statement.

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

    1...38394041Page 39 of 41
    © Great America News Desk 2022