Random

    Opinion

    Home Opinion Page 39

    ‘Target’ Woke Companies and Huge Investment Firms Behind Them

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    3
    Marcha del orgullo en Paraná, Entre Ríos, Argentina. Noviembre de 2021 via Wikimedia commons

    ANALYSIS – ‘Go woke – Go Broke’ – The saga of Budweiser and Target’s disastrous forays into transgender politics is great for conservatives, and all Americans. 

    It shows how national grassroots pressure can force giant woke companies to lose billions of dollars in a matter of weeks.

    But more importantly, it shows us other ways to fight back. To truly force change we have to effectively leverage these boycotts and go way beyond them. 

    We need to go after the behemoth investment firms that push and incentivize these corporations to go even more woke.

    Elon Musk just hinted at the next battleground – courtrooms. 

    Referring to Target’s decision to sell LGBT-themed items and clothing aimed at families and kids (including ‘onesies’ for toddlers and books instructing kids on using transgender pronouns), and the ensuing financial backlash, Musk said Friday that it’s just a matter of time before Target faces lawsuits for “destruction of shareholder value.”

    “Won’t be long before there are class-action lawsuits by shareholders against the company and board of directors for the destruction of shareholder value,” he tweeted.

    Musk made the remarks in response to a tweet by conservative activist Charlie Kirk, who posted about JPMorgan downgrading Target’s stock after suffering its longest consecutive drop in decades.

    Kirk replied by saying that shareholders should organize to get politics out of the “hyperpolitical” corporations of today.

    And that is exactly what should be done. 

    Conservatives should also consider buying just one share of each offending company to give them legal rights as shareholders. And then take the companies to court.

    These lawsuits won’t just put the offending companies on notice, but their huge investment firm backers too.

    A big factor encouraging brands to promote transgender ideologies is an attempt to score points on lefty environmental, social, and governance (ESG) standards that are being foisted on organizations all over the country. 

    And this is a product of leftist political pressures and aggressively activist investment firms.

    During an appearance on Fox News, Anson Frericks, an ex-top Anheuser-Busch executive, said that quiet pressure from huge investment firms like New York-based BlackRock and Pennsylvania-based Vanguard is behind many of the controversial decisions by the woke companies they are heavily invested in.

    He noted that BlackRock, Vanguard, and another firm, State Street, manage about $20 trillion in capital and use their power to promote leftist political agendas.

    However, it’s also not necessarily coming from the investment firms organically, since they too are being pressured by progressive lawmakers overseeing giant government pension funds that the investment firms profit from.

    These hyper-politicized monster government pension funds are the ones really calling the shots.

    One of the huge investment firms mentioned earlier, manages California’s massive pension fund — the country’s biggest — and California’s leftist politicians have a big say in the corporate governance and politics of the firms the fund invests in, Frericks noted.

    “In California, for example, they recently have mandated those large pension funds [sic] that they divest from things like fossil fuels and oil and gas…”

    “But they also tell BlackRock, State Street, and Vanguard if they’re going to manage their money, they have to commit to things like ESG — diversity, equity, inclusion — and adopt firm-wide commitments that they therefore then force onto all the major companies in corporate America,” he added.

    So, we need to find ways to limit the power and influence of these monstrous and highly politicized government pension funds that use taxpayer funds to push radical agendas.

    We should also note that this isn’t just a conservative issue. Erin Elmore at Turning Point USA, reported The Epoch Times, argued that calls to boycott Target are “not necessarily conservative.”

    Instead, she said, “it’s common sense. Most parents don’t support satanists or little boys wearing girls’ bathing suits,” she tweeted on May 28.

    This isn’t a conservative-liberal thing. It’s an American thing.

    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.

    ‘Transnational Repression’ – FBI ‘Very Concerned’ by Illegal Chinese ‘Police Stations’ in US and Abroad

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    4
    Joe Biden via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    ANALYSIS – Highlighting the real domestic security threat by China, the FBI is apparently ‘very concerned’ about, and investigating, the alleged Chinese Communist (Chicom) police stations likely set up illegally in New York, among other cities.

    This is yet another domestic security failure by a Biden administration obsessed with Jan 6 and persecuting conservatives instead of combatting real foreign threats to the nation.

    I have written about these dangerous and repressive Chicom police outposts in the U.S., Canada, and elsewhere before.  

    While ostensibly run by China’s Ministry of Interior via its police forces, and using ‘volunteers,’ the feared Chinese Ministry of State Security (MSS) – which is both an intelligence and security service – is likely heavily involved with this effort.

    China claims the outposts are merely police service centers to help Chinese ex-pats living abroad. 

    But if you believe that, there is also a bridge for sale in Brooklyn.

    These outposts are mostly being used to monitor, coerce, and sometimes forcibly remove Chinese dissidents living overseas.

    The heightened scrutiny on them follows a September report by Safeguard Defenders, a Europe-based human rights organization, that revealed the existence of dozens of Chinese police ‘service stations’ in major cities around the world, including New York.

    Safeguard Defenders reported that China has set up at least 54 “overseas police service stations” around the world, including one in New York City and three in Toronto. The group said its list was based on official statements, but the actual number may be higher.

    While tasked with cracking down on Chinese-related illegal activities overseas, the police stations represent “the latest iteration in [China’s] growing transnational repression, where it seeks to police and limit political expression far beyond its own borders,” the report said.

    While congressional Democrats obsessed myopically on Jan 6, Republicans in Congress have taken this Chicom threat seriously, requesting answers from Team Biden administration about their legality and influence.

    And finally, we see some response.

    As Reuters reported, Thursday, FBI Director Christopher Wray told lawmakers at the U.S. Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing that he is “very concerned about this. We are aware of the existence of these stations.” 

    However, Wray declined to detail the FBI’s investigations into this threat.

    Wray added: 

    I have to be careful about discussing our specific investigative work, but to me, it is outrageous to think that the Chinese police would attempt to set up shop, you know, in New York, let’s say, without proper coordination. It violates sovereignty and circumvents standard judicial and law enforcement cooperation processes.

    When asked by Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., if such stations violated U.S. law, Wray said the FBI was “looking into the legal parameters of it” and had talked to the Justice Department and the Department of State about unsanctioned operations.

    Wray added that the United States has indicted a number of Chinese government assets involved in harassing, stalking, surveilling, and blackmailing opponents of China’s leader-for-life Xi Jinping who are living in the United States.

    Many of these indicted assets were involved in a notorious Chicom effort to repatriate Chinese dissidents back to China known as “Operation Fox Hunt.”

    “It’s a real problem and something that we’re talking with our foreign partners about, as well, because we’re not the only country where this has occurred,” Wray said.

    According to AP most of the Chinese overseas police stations are concentrated in Europe. 

    The Irish government said last month it had asked China to shut down a police station operating in Dublin. The Dutch government said it was looking into whether two stations named in the report were established in the Netherlands.

    In the two months since the Safeguard Defenders’ report was released, at least 14 governments, including those of Britain, Canada and Germany, have opened investigations into the operations, according to Safeguard Defenders.

    VOA News reported that:

    In response to China’s increased use of transnational repression, the Biden administration has adopted a whole-of-government approach that includes visa restrictions, export controls, and the investigation and prosecution of perpetrators, Uzra Zeya, undersecretary of state for civilian security, democracy and human rights, told a congressional panel in June.

    These are all good first steps, but much more needs to be done to neutralize China’s extraterritorial repression in the U.S. and allied nations. 

    And do so quickly.

    Among additional moves, Team Biden must pressure all the nations listed as having extraterritorial Chinese police stations. This includes Germany, which sees no issues with the Chicom police outpost there.

    But as with its meekness in facing Russia, Germany has a history of turning a blind eye to the threat posed by the Chinese Communists as well.

    It’s time the U.S. makes a very public example of ‘delinquent’ Germany, as President Trump did earlier. 

    But don’t expect this current administration to do much.

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

    ‘Barbie’ Movie Banned in Vietnam as Hollywood Again Kowtows to China

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    1

    ANALYSIS – China’s outrageous claim to almost the entire South China Sea – everything within a “nine-dash line” drawn on Chinese maps – has taken its most recent victim – the movie-viewing public in Vietnam. The Vietnamese government has banned the movie due to a scene with that Chinese-made line on a map.

    China takes its illegal claim very seriously and strives to impose its visual representation on maps everywhere, including those appearing in Hollywood movies.

    While it’s unclear why the soon-to-be-released film ‘Barbie’ about the iconic doll and her boyfriend Ken would get embroiled in international politics, it has. 

    This south China Sea has been a flashpoint between Vietnam and China for years. The artificial line is shown on Chinese maps to mark their claims over the area despite Vietnam, the Philippines, Indonesia, Brunei, Malaysia, and Taiwan claiming parts of the same vast expanse of sea.

    Chinese warships and fishing vessels routinely operate in these waters to establish de-facto presence, often provoking clashes with neighboring countries.

    The Daily Wire (DW) reported:

    “We do not grant license for the American movie ‘Barbie’ to release in Vietnam because it contains the offending image of the nine-dash line,” Vi Kien Thanh, head of the Department of Cinema, a government body in charge of licensing and censoring foreign films, was quoted as saying in the state-run Tuoi Tre newspaper.

    The movie’s trailer shows Barbie leaving her perfect doll world and to explore the “real world” after becoming disillusioned with her life.

    So why did a big Hollywood studio decide to include this ridiculous claim in their otherwise non-political movies?

    All I can think of is – in order to please the communists in Beijing. China is obviously a far bigger market than Vietnam. And who knows if Chinese investors were involved in the movie’s production.

    DW notes:

    “Barbie” isn’t the first film banned for including the nine-dash line. The Vietnamese government also blocked the DreamWorks animated film “Abominable” (2019) and the action-adventure film “Unchartered” (2022) for the same reason. Netflix removed the Australian spy drama “Pine Gap” in 2021 for their inclusion of the line.

    Hollywood blockbusters including the Marvel films “Eternals” and “Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings” have also been in China after directors or actors involved in the films made comments critical of China.

    Another big controversy exploded in 2019 over the Tom Cruise movie ‘Top Gun: Maverick.’ Initially the movie appeared to remove the flags of Taiwan and Japan from Maverick’s flight jacket. The flags were part of historical patches representing prior U.S. naval deployments to the region.

    As NBC News reported:

    In 2019, the trailer for “Top Gun: Maverick” showed Cruise’s character, U.S. Navy pilot Pete Mitchell, in the same bomber jacket he wore in the original film. But two of its flag patches — representing Japan and the Republic of China, the official name for Taiwan — appeared to have been replaced by other emblems.

    The move was criticized at the time as an act of self-censorship to please China’s censors. Beijing sees Taiwan, a self-ruling democracy of 24 million people, as an inalienable part of its territory and lashes out at any reference to it as a sovereign nation.  

    In this case Hollywood, or Cruise, had a change of heart and reversed their apparent kowtowing to China. CHinese investors also pulled out of the movie.

    NBC News continued:

    On the film’s release last month after a two-year pandemic delay, both flags had been restored. At an advance screening in Taipei, the audience broke out in cheers and applause at the sight of the Taiwanese flag on the big screen, local news outlet SETN reported.

    Sometimes in Hollywood the good guys do win. Sadly, not in the case of Barbie.

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

    Biden DOJ Wants Even Harsher Sentences for Key Jan. 6 Rioters

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    3
    Elvert Barnes, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

    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.

    2020 Election – DHS Colluded With Private Groups To Censor Conservatives

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    7
    NEW YORK CITY (September 11, 2022) Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas lays flowers for USSS Master Special Officer Craig Miller and participates in the September 11th Anniversary Commemoration Ceremony at Ground Zero in New York City, NY. (DHS photo by Sydney Phoenix)

    ANALYSIS – Yes, this was election interference. Under the guise of combating ‘misinformation’ the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) led the effort that colluded with major universities and Big Tech to censor free speech leading up to the 2020 election.

    As House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, said Monday, according to Newsmax: “This pressure was largely directed in a way that benefited one side of the political aisle: true information posted by Republicans and conservatives was labeled as ‘misinformation’ while false information posted by Democrats and liberals was largely unreported and untouched by the censors.”

    How did they do this?

    An interim staff report by the House Judiciary Committee and its Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government explained that DHS, so-called disinformation “experts” at universities, Big Tech and others colluded through the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP) to monitor and censor Americans’ online speech during the 2020 election.

    “The federal government and universities pressured social media companies to censor true information, jokes and political opinions.”

    Among the DHS targets was Newsmax, according to a summary of the report, titled “The Weaponization of ‘Disinformation’ Pseudo-experts and Bureaucrats: How the Federal Government Partnered with Universities to Censor Americans’ Free Speech.”

    Newsmax reported: “The report revealed how the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), and the Global Engagement Center (GEC) within the State Department coordinated with Stanford University and other entities to create the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP) to censor Americans’ speech in the lead-up to the election.”

    In a post on X, Jordan wrote, “according to one EIP member, the EIP was created ‘at the request of CISA.’ The head of the EIP also said that EIP was created after ‘working on some monitoring ideas with CISA.'”

    Newsmax added:

    It [the report] outlines how the EIP was created in the summer of 2020 to provide a way for the federal government “to launder its censorship activities in hopes of bypassing the First Amendment and public scrutiny.”

    “The EIP targeted Americans across the political spectrum, but especially conservatives,” according to the report’s summary.

    The House committee found that EIP, using Stanford, encouraged social media outlets like Facebook and Twitter, now known as X, to declare conservative news as “misinformation.”

    Newsmax continued: “ EIP used a tactic known as “switchboarding” to refer to removal requests from state and local officials to Facebook, X and other social media sites, the New York Post reported Monday…the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in Louisiana ruled in September federal officials colluded with Big Tech social media platforms to suppress speech.”

    And they didn’t just censor everyday Americans, they also targeted Republican politicians ranging from former President Donald Trump, Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., to former Speaker Newt Gingrich and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.

    Among the media, the report noted, in addition to Newsmax, this corrupt political effort targeted conservative commentators such as Candace Owens, Charlie Kirk, Michelle Malkin and Mollie Hemingway, and “an untold number of everyday Americans of all political affiliations.”

    As an added note, I was permanently banned from LinkedIn, where I had a growing following in the tens of thousands, back in 2022.

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

    Amanda Head: Protect Our Kids!

    By
    Amanda Head
    -
    3

    In the wake of the tragic Covenant Christian Elementary School shooting there has been a renewed push to employ school safety officers throughout the country…

    What do you think?

    Watch Amanda explain the controversy below:

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

    Did Biden Appoint a Chinese Mole? GOP Lawmakers Demand FBI Investigate

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    10
    Joe Biden via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    ANALYSIS – While Joe Biden’s weak response to the Chinese spy balloon that crossed the entire country before being shot down has put him under pressure, Biden is now also under fire for possibly appointing a Chinese Communist Party (CCP) mole to a U.S. government post focused on Asia.

    And several Republican lawmakers are demanding the FBI investigate.

    The suspected Chinese communist mole, or spy, is Dominic Ng, CEO of East West Bank, appointed by Biden to represent the U.S. at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC).

    In a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray the lawmakers wrote: “We request the FBI investigate and provide a report to Congress on the extent of Mr. Ng’s knowledge of sensitive information, as well as any potential violations of The Espionage Act.” 

    The lawmakers add: “The Biden Administration has allowed the CCP to infiltrate the third-party sector and, consequently, political leaders that have existing relationships to these groups and are privy to U.S. intelligence.”

    According to the Daily Caller News Foundation (DCNF), Ng is a current and former member of two alleged front groups serving a “Chinese intelligence service.”

    According to the Daily Caller: “Ng served as ‘executive director’ of the China Overseas Exchange Association until 2017 and still serves in that capacity at the related China Overseas Friendship Association, according to DCNF translations of those groups’ archived rosters.”

    Multiple China intelligence analysts have identified these two entities as front groups for China’s United Front Work Department (UFWD), a Chinese intelligence service.

    UFWD is tasked with infiltrating U.S. and other foreign political parties, conducting ‘influence’ operations, and collecting intelligence.

    In 2020, Ng helped grease the wheels for his appointment by donating $100,000 to the Biden Victory Fund and $35,500 to the Democratic National Committee in 2020.

    The Daily Caller reports that Ng’s CCP ties first came under scrutiny in April 2022, when Biden appointed the banker to a one-year position representing the U.S. on the Business Advisory Council of APEC, soon after he made his large political donations. 

    Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio called Ng’s alleged CCP ties “beyond disturbing and concerning” in a Feb. 10 tweet. 

    Texas Republican Rep. Lance Gooden told the DCNF: “President Biden ignored Dominic Ng’s extensive ties to the CCP and Chinese intelligence groups, happily took his campaign donations, and in return appointed a possible Chinese spy to a senior government position.” 

    Gooden added that Ng was “compromised at best and a traitor at worst.”

    But this one appointee is only the tip of the Chinese infiltration of the U.S. political system, primarily via the Democrat Party in California. 

    We all know California Democrat Rep. Eric Swalwell, who was compromised by an attractive female Chinese spy aptly called Fang Fang, even as he served on the House Intelligence Committee.

    The letter notes how other influential Democrat politicians from California may also be linked to the CCP:

    Prior to his appointment to APEC, California Democratic Representative Judy Chu advocated for Mr. Ng’s nomination to be the U.S. Secretary of Commerce. Like Mr. Ng, California Representative Judy Chu is the “honorary president” for the All America Chinese Youth Federations (AACYF), a 501(c)(3) non-profit whose mission is to strengthen the social impact of the Chinese community within the U.S.

    However, under Representative Chu’s tenure, five of AACYF’s leaders have been alleged members of organizations belonging to UFWD.

    The letter signed by six Republican members of Congress, Lance Gooden and Keith Self of Texas, Tom Tiffany of Wisconsin, Lauren Boebert of Colorado, Ben Cline of Virginia and Doug LaMalfa of California, adds: 

    China has proved themselves as our greatest adversary and foreign competitor, and yet our leaders continuously jeopardize U.S. national security by allowing the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to infiltrate our third-party sector and federal government.

    The letter continues: “This lack of scrutiny should be promptly evaluated, and the Biden Administration should take immediate steps to ensure blunders like this will not happen again.”

    “These are incredibly troubling disclosures,” Tiffany told the DCNF. “The FBI ought to be taking a very serious look at them.”

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

    New Documents Reveal Biden FBI’s Panicked Attempt To Cover Up Spying On Christians

    By
    Donny Ferguson
    -
    4

    A lawsuit from a non-profit public interest law firm has uncovered documents showing the Biden administration’s rushed efforts to cover up a Federal Bureau of Investigations operation that spied on Catholic churches, even as Catholics were targeted by pro-abortion terrorists.

    Judicial Watch, working with CatholicVote Civic Action, received 131 heavily redacted pages of records from the FBI “showing top officials rushing to craft a public response to the leaked FBI intelligence memo that revealed its targeting of Catholics who adhere to traditional beliefs on church issues,” JW reports.

    “After seven months of delay and more to come, Joe Biden’s FBI remains committed to one thing: covering up their un-American spying on Catholic citizens,” said former Congressman Huelskamp, Ph.D., Senior Advisor to CatholicVote. “By fully withholding more than 200 pages of public documents, the Biden administration is more interested in hiding the truth than ending this unconstitutional witch hunt of Catholics and other faithful Americans.”

    “The FBI launched a vicious spy effort against Catholics and sought to spy on parishioners as they sat in church pews,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “These records show top FBI officials were panicked in response about their domestic spying abuse leaking out.”

    Judicial Watch received the records “in response to an April 2023 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit it filed along with CatholicVoteCivic Action against the FBI and the Department of Justice after their failure to respond to March 2023 requests for records about an FBI intelligence memo targeting “radical traditionalist” Catholics (CatholicVote Civic Action and Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Federal Bureau of Investigations and Department of Justice (No. 1:23-cv-01166)).”

    In February 2023, an FBI intelligence document was leaked that revealed FBI infiltrated and spied on several Catholic churches as part of a fruitless operation that claimed traditional Catholics and pro-life Americans were a terrorist threat – even as the liberal pro-abortion terrorist group “Jane’s Revenge” carried out a nationwide campaign of terrorism and arson attacks.

    According to JW, the newly obtained records include a February 8, 2023, email with the subject line “Media Request: FBI Richmond Document cites SPLC” from the FBI’s National Press Office alerting FBI officials regarding media inquiries:

    We have inquiries from the Washington Examiner and The Daily Signal (Heritage Foundation) about an article written by [redacted]. It references a January intelligence product from the Richmond Field office. After speaking with SC Goodwater, I am alerting all of you so we can get a copy of the actual document and hear any recommendations on how to respond. I am attaching a cut and paste of the [redacted] article.

    JW reports Miriam Coakley of the Office of General Counsel then forwarded the email on to other FBI officials, noting, “Adding InTo [Insider Threat Office], SecD [Security Division] and OPR [Office of Professional Responsibility]. The date of the leaked domain perspective appears to be 23 Jan. 2023.”

    “Further along the chain, an official in the Office of Public Affairs forwards the chain to more people, saying, ‘Adding Pamela Bryon from the DI. [Deputy Asst. Director of Intelligence Pamela Byron.] Any info on how this product came about would be appreciated,’” JW repors.

    In a heavily redacted reply, Byron responds:

    As mentioned on FBINET, the type of product leaked is a Domain Perspective (DP) – the purpose of DPs is to offer information and/or highlight how a shift or new development in an AOR (domain) related to an environmental variable could impact the threat. Environmental variables include demographic shifts, technology development, economic conditions, special events, social/cultural conditions, etc. In particular, the analysis in DPs (as in FBI products in general) is focused on the activity of identified or potential threat actors, not on the environmental variables themselves, and how those threat actors react to shifts in the environment and the subsequent impact on the threat posed by those actors.

    In that context, there are a couple of things to note with this situation: [redacted].

    We stand by to assist with any other questions.

    Additional records secured by JW include a February 9 email with the subject line “Coordination of Draft statement regarding leaked RH intel document” from Office of Public Affairs official Douglas Goodwater to top FBI officials, including FBI Chief of Staff Johathan Lenzner, Asst. Dir. for Intelligence Tonya Ugoretz, Asst. Dir. for Counterterrorism Robert Wells and others:

    Draft/pre decision, Coordination for media statement – DI/CTD/OGC [Directorate of Intelligence/Counterterrorism Division/Office of General Counsel]

    Potential statement for review/edits-: [Redacted].

    Asst. Director for Public Affairs Catherine Milhoan then responds:

    All, we have received two new inquiries in addition to the three last night and are making the decision to respond in the next hour. We want to get our statement out before this picks up any steam.

    DI/CTD/OCG,

    Please review the draft and let us know if you have any edits or concerns.

    JW then notes:

    Stanley Meador, Special Agent-in-Charge of the Richmond Field Office, replies, “Looks good. One small suggestion in yellow. I would send it out. It is migrating onto Fox. https://www.foxnews.com/media/purported-fbi-document-suggests-agency-targeting-catholics-attend-latin-mass.”

    On February 10, 2023, FBI Chief of Staff Jonathan Lenzner emails FBI colleagues with the subject “intel piece that has been withdrawn,” saying, “I don’t know if we are there yet, [redacted].”

    Lenzner then follows up on February 13, writing, “Looks like at least one religious organization is speaking out publicly: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/catholic-league-condemns-fbi-internal-memo-targeting-catholics.”

    Ryan T. Young, the Executive Assistant Director of the Intelligence Branch replies to Lenzner, “Not a good look … Real frustrating when it is self-inflicted. I’ll be back in town Wednesday. We can look into next best steps.”

    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.

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