Opinion

Home Opinion Page 39

Biden Admin. Spied On Bank Accounts Of Trump Supporters

1
Image via Pixabay free images.

Americans who purchased Bibles, sporting goods or products associated with former President Donald Trump were flagged for surveillance by a federal government spy program, U.S. House investigators reveal.

After the January 6, 2021 riot at the U.S. Capitol, FBI officials told banks that Americans who support President Trump or express religious views may be suspected terrorists, and demanded banks report customers whose transactions indicated they may be political conservatives.

Such blanket surveillance is prohibited by the United States Constitution, which requires the federal government to secure a warrant, based on probable cause, specifically naming the person targeted.

“New documents obtained by the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government reveal that the federal government flagged terms like “MAGA” and “TRUMP” for financial institutions if Americans used those phrases when completing transactions,” the U.S. House Judiciary Committee revealed in a statement.

“Individuals who shopped at stores like Cabela’s or Dick’s Sporting Goods, or purchased religious texts like a bible, may also have had their transactions flagged. This kind of pervasive financial surveillance, carried out in coordination with and at the request of federal law enforcement, into Americans’ private transactions is alarming and raises serious concerns about the FBI’s respect for fundamental civil liberties,” the Committee stated.

In response, the Committee is demanding senior government officials appear for questioning.

“In light of these revelations, Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) has requested transcribed interviews from Peter Sullivan, Senior Private Sector Partner for Outreach in the Strategic Partner Engagement Section of the FBI, and Noah Bishoff, former Director of the Office of Stakeholder Integration and Engagement in the Strategic Operations Division of the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN),” the Committee reveals.

Jordan’s letter to Noah Bishoff reads, in part: 

“The Committee and Select Subcommittee have obtained documents indicating that following January 6, 2021, FinCEN distributed materials to financial institutions that, among other things, outline the ‘typologies’ of various persons of interest and provide financial institutions with suggested search terms and Merchant Category Codes (MCCs) for identifying transactions on behalf of federal law enforcement. These materials included a document recommending the use of generic terms like ‘TRUMP’ and ‘MAGA’ to ‘search Zelle payment messages’ as well as a ‘prior FinCEN analysis’ of ‘Lone Actor/Homegrown Violent Extremism Indicators.’ According to this analysis, FinCEN warned financial institutions of ‘extremism’ indicators that include ‘transportation charges, such as bus tickets, rental cars, or plane tickets, for travel to areas with no apparent purpose,’ or ‘the purchase of books (including religious texts) and subscriptions to other media containing extremist views.’ In other words, FinCEN urged large financial institutions to comb through the private transactions of their customers for suspicious charges on the basis of protected political and religious expression.

“In addition, the Committee and Select Subcommittee have obtained documents showing that FinCEN distributed slides, prepared by a financial institution, explaining how other financial institutions can use MCC codes to detect customers whose transactions may reflect ‘potential active shooters, [and] who may include dangerous International Terrorists / Domestic Terrorists / Homegrown Violent Extremists (“Lone Wolves”).’ For example, the slides instruct financial institutions to query for transactions using certain MCC codes such as ‘3484: Small Arms,’ ‘5091: Sporting and Recreational Goods and Supplies,’ and the keywords ‘Cabela’s,’ and ‘Dick’s Sporting Goods,’ among several others. Despite these transactions having no apparent criminal nexus—and, in fact, relate to Americans exercising their Second Amendment rights—FinCEN seems to have adopted a characterization of these Americans as potential threat actors. This kind of pervasive financial surveillance, carried out in coordination with and at the request of federal law enforcement, into Americans’ private transactions is alarming and raises serious doubts about FinCEN’s respect for fundamental civil liberties.

“As the former Director of the Office of Stakeholder Integration and Engagement in the Strategic Operations Division, you engaged regularly with financial institutions following the events of January 6, 2021, including the distribution of material about how financial institutions could use private customer information to assist federal law enforcement. As such, your testimony will aid our oversight. In particular, your testimony will help to inform the Committee and Select Subcommittee about federal law enforcement’s mass accumulation and use of Americans’ private information without legal process; FinCEN’s protocols, if any, to safeguard Americans’ privacy and constitutional rights in the receipt and use of such information; and FinCEN’s general engagement with the private sector on law-enforcement matters.”

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

Jan. 6th Rioters Handed Down Longest Sentences Yet In This Week’s Hearings

5
Ted Eytan from Washington, DC, USA, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

ANALYSIS – Two Proud Boys leaders have been sentenced to more than a decade each in jail after being convicted of the rarely used ‘seditious conspiracy’ charge for storming the Capitol.

They tried to overturn President Donald Trump’s 2020 election loss, which they considered fraudulent.

A federal judge sentenced former far-right Proud Boys leader Joseph Biggs to 17 years in prison and his co-defendant Zachary Rehl to 15 years. (RELATED: Proud Boys Member Who Led Capitol Break-In Sentenced To 10 Years)

These sentences are much less than the three decades of jail time proposed by prosecutors but still very long prison terms for a few hours of rioting.

And yes, I understand that the rioting was at the U.S. Capitol and that the certification of the Electoral College vote was in process. I also understand these two guys and the two others convicted on this same charge were intimately involved in organizing what became violent chaos that day.

I was there, at the Capitol, as an observer with a TV camera crew. And I denounced the violence the next day. It was outrageous.

I believe any violent rioter who attacked police or media, or anyone else, on Jan. 6 should be put in jail – as should all the BLM rioters who earlier caused $2 billion in damages throughout the country and injured 2,000 cops months earlier.

But a decade or two behind bars for ‘conspiracy’?

Biggs and Rehl are the first Proud Boys convicted of the Civil War-era seditious conspiracy charge to be sentenced for their roles in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack.

The sentences kicked off a series of hearings scheduled for this week and next, where punishment will be meted out against the former chairman of the Proud Boys, Enrique Tarrio (who was not in D.C. on Jan. 6 but was unbelievably arrested earlier for burning a BLM banner!), and two other members of the group.

All were convicted of seditious conspiracy and other crimes at a landmark conspiracy trial this spring. But was what they did really as bad as the Biden Justice Department tries to portray?

As The Guardian noted:

Seditious conspiracy is a broad statute that concerns attempts to overthrow the government, levy war against it or prevent, hinder or delay the execution of any law. It also can be applied in cases where suspects seize any government property and carries up to 20 years in prison if convicted.

Partly because seditious conspiracy allegations carry so much political weight, prosecutors have generally been hesitant to bring such charges in the past. “Seditious conspiracy charges are rarely used in American jurisprudence,” said Jeffrey Ian Ross, a criminologist and expert on political crime at the University of Baltimore. Prosecutors can be wary of issuing such charges, even in cases that may fall under its broad statute, he added.

In the only similar case in the 20th century, federal prosecutors secured a seditious conspiracy conviction against Puerto Rican nationalists who stormed the Capitol building in 1954.

These four armed Puerto Rican independence militants entered the House floor and fired dozens of bullets around the chamber, wounding five legislators.

The four shooters and co-conspirators were convicted of seditious conspiracy and spent over two decades in jail until Jimmy Carter commuted their sentence in 1979.

In that case, however, the perpetrators had firearms and used them to try to kill Congressmen. That’s a pretty big difference.

The last successfully prosecuted seditious conspiracy was in the mid-1990s, when authorities charged Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman and nine Islamist co-conspirators for plotting to bomb the United Nations, the FBI building, and several other landmarks around New York City.

Again, this was very serious and involved planning mass murder and terrorism.

There is little or no evidence that any Jan. 6 rioters planned any offensive violence.

To date, of those charged in relation to Jan. 6, former Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes holds the record with an 18-year sentence, after he was convicted of seditious conspiracy earlier this year.

The Guardian reported in 2022 that:

Even Rhodes, who is not believed to have actually stormed the building, is alleged to have plotted to bring weapons to the area and coordinate militia movements.

In the weeks before the insurrection, Rhodes allegedly purchased tens of thousands of dollars worth of weapons and began communicating to other Oath Keepers in an encrypted group chat. “We aren’t getting through this without a civil war,” he messaged days after the presidential election. One Oath Keeper admitted as part of a plea deal last year that he brought an M4 rifle to a Comfort Inn hotel near the Capitol, while Rhodes and others allegedly discussed “quick reaction force” teams that could move into Washington DC with firearms. Once inside the Capitol, prosecutors state in their indictment that one group of Oath Keepers moved in a military “stack” formation and went in search of the speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi.

And at first glance, this does seem serious.

But Rhodes claims that despite earlier texts about possible ‘civil war,’ Oath Keepers who entered the Capitol went “totally off mission” and that he was only there to prevent his militia members from getting into trouble.

He has also stated that the armed ‘reaction force’ in Virginia was there to respond if armed leftist antifa thugs attacked pro-Trump protestors.

In the largest manhunt in FBI history, more than 1,100 people have been arrested on charges related to the Capitol assault. Of those, 597 defendants have had their cases adjudicated and received sentences. About 366 of them have been given jail time.

The vast majority of these Jan. 6 defendants, though, accepted plea deals for minor, nonviolent offenses such as trespassing or obstructing an official function. Many of them still got jail sentences totally out of proportion to their alleged crimes.

And these four got the worst of it.

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk. It was first published in American Liberty News.

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

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.

Amanda Head: Tucker Is Out At Fox News

1

Did you ever expect this?

Less than one week after Fox News settled a major defamation suit against Dominion Voting Systems the network has parted ways with one of its biggest stars…

Watch Amanda explain the controversy below:

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

Trump Family Member Reveals Why She Will ‘Never’ Get Into Politics

While politics might run in the family, one Trump is staying far away…

President Donald Trump’s granddaughter, Kai, who is slated to play college golf next fall at the University of Miami, said she has no interest in following in her grandfather’s footsteps.

“To be honest with you, I stay out of politics completely. I would never run, I don’t want anything to do with politics,” Trump said during an appearance on Logan Paul’s podcast. “I feel like politics is such a dangerous thing, and I think if both sides met in the middle, everyone would be so much more happier.”

Trump said people have gotten “too extreme” on both sides of the coin, and social media has driven people to hone in on their beliefs.

“There’s not a lot of things on social media where you’re very much in the middle. And I think that kind of makes some people crazy and some people buy into it too much,” Trump added. “I think that’s like the best way to say it. There’s no bad blood. I’m very much in the middle and kind of like, it is what it is. They ran against each other [Trump and Kamala Harris]. Obviously, I’m gonna support my grandpa, my family member, but that’s pretty much it.”

The closest Trump has dove into the political waters was when she spoke at the Republican National Convention just days after her grandfather was shot in Butler, Pennsylvania.

In an interview with Fox News Digital in October, Trump said she was “proud” of her grandfather after he brokered the historic ceasefire between Israel and Hamas.

“Always will support him. I think he’s doing amazing things,” she said.

White Kai Trump may not be interested in politics the same can’t be said for her father, Donald Trump Jr., who has been floated as a future presidential contender. Don Jr, the eldest of the two sons Trump had with Ivana, channels his father’s combative style and is viewed by many as a bridge between Trump’s base.

The Independent reports:

Back in August, a McLaughlin & Associates survey had Vance sitting pretty at 36 per cent, with Donald Trump Jr a distant second at 16 per cent. By October, that gap had narrowed, with [VP] Vance at 38 per cent and Trump Jr at 20 per cent (Rubio was in third place at 7 per cent). Then came the November poll, which probably sent shockwaves through Vance’s inner circle: the vice president’s support had slipped to 34 per cent, while Trump Jr had surged.

“I’m a Second Amendment person, and I don’t know anything about Vance’s position on it,” says Liz Mair, veteran Republican strategist. “For a real Second Amendment voter, the only people I would truly be comfortable supporting right now would be Donald Trump Jr or Ron DeSantis. And I’d probably be more comfortable with Donald Trump Jr. It depends on each state, but for diehard gun voters, it’s a significant issue, and it was one reason Trump Sr had challenges in 2016.”

Trump Jr has played his hand with characteristic bravado, dismissing speculation in one media organisation that he intends to run. “I’m actually glad you’re printing this bulls**t,” he wrote on X, “because at least now the rest of the press corps will see how s****y your ‘sources’ are and how easily you’re played by them. Congrats, moron.”

Yet, as is often the case in this family, denials are never absolute. In May 2025, when asked at a panel in Qatar if he would “pick up the reins” after Trump leaves office, he replied: “I don’t know. Maybe one day, you know, that calling is there.” Junior wields that ambiguity like a political weapon – a constant reminder that another Trump is waiting in the wings.

Top Trump Adviser Drops Vice President Suggestion and It’s Wild

0
Donald Trump via Gage Skidmore Flickr

A legendary political adviser to former President Donald Trump is offering up his suggestion for a possible 2024 vice presidential nominee – one that would shock the political establishment.

In a recent edition of his “Stone Cold Truth with Roger Stone” Substack, former Trump and Nixon White House adviser Roger Stone suggests that if Trump wins the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, he pick Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. as his running mate.

“Given America’s state of peril, if RFK performs better than expected, the former President should consider the drafting of RFK as the Republican vice presidential candidate in a ‘bipartisan’ unity ticket,” Stone writes.

“This idea is not without precedent; Senator John McCain really wanted Democrat Senator Joe Lieberman as his running mate in 2008. McCain was ultimately talked out of the idea,” Stone notes.


Were Trump were to do that, it would be historic.  

Kennedy, the son of former New York senator and United States Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, is currently running for the Democratic presidential nomination against President Joe Biden.

It would also be highly controversial.  

In addition to strident left-wing political positions, Kennedy is also an outspoken conspiracy theorist and has been condemned by members of his own family for his public statements about what he believes to be a link between vaccinations and autism, along with health complications.

“Kennedy and President Donald Trump were good friends prior to Trump’s elevation to the presidency,” Stone writes.

“It has been reported that Trump, who shared Kennedy’s concerns regarding the link between vaccinations and autism, had promised RFK the appointment of a balanced blue-ribbon commission to study and report to the President on the safety and effectiveness of vaccinations,” Stone writes, adding “Trump’s failure to follow through on this pledge is most likely a significant factor in Kennedy’s decision to run in 2024.”

Nevertheless, Stone believes a Trump-Kennedy ticket could be strong.

“(T)he selection of RFK would silence those within the Republican Party who are today critical, in retrospect, of Trump’s handling of the Covid-19 pandemic, as well as building a bridge for thousands of Democrats and Independents disgusted by Biden’s fumbling foreign policy and the implication of the collapse of U.S. economic dominance to vote for Trump,” Stone writes.

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

Veteran Gun Store Owner Saves Lives by Storing Other Vet’s Firearms

1
Police image via Pixabay free images

ANALYSIS – Every now and then you see a story that just hits home, and you know you need to write about it and spread the word. This one, reported by CBS News, is absolutely one of them.

Caleb Morse, 39, an Army combat veteran, set up Rustic Renegade, a gun shop and shooting range in 2018 in Lafayette, Louisiana.

Morse had served two combat tours in Iraq with the Army’s 2nd Infantry Division Special Troops Battalion, followed by service in the National Guard, and then worked as a military contractor in Iraq for four years.

One day an Army buddy Morse served with in Iraq showed up at his gun store with his car and his dog. Then he brought a lot of guns inside the store, Morse said, adding: “And I’m like, brother, what are you doing?”

Morse knew well that often when people, especially combat veterans, start giving away their things, they may be considering suicide. 

But before Morse could have a chat with his buddy, the vet simply left. And for six months his buddy didn’t answer his phone.

Meanwhile, Morse decided to hold his friend’s guns at Rustic Renegade in case he ever came back. 

Thankfully, as CBS News reported:

…his friend called and explained he had been in a bad spot and wondered where his guns were.  Morse said he told him, “They’re your guns, man. They’re yours, you may want them back. And whenever you’re ready, they’re here for you.

“More than half of all gun-related deaths in the United States are suicides, according to the Centers for Disease Control. In 2022, the CDC reported that 26,993 people died by firearm suicide. Deaths by gun suicide are at an all-time high and have steadily increased, nearly uninterrupted, since 2006 according to researchers at John Hopkins School of Public Health. 

In the veteran population the problem is acute; in its 2022 National Veteran Suicide Prevention Report, the Department of Veterans Affairs found that the suicide rate in 2020 was 57.3 % greater for veterans.  

Guns are more commonly involved among veteran suicides, at 71%, than the rest of the population, at 50.3%, according to the CDC.

Soon after his first buddy chose to drop off his guns with Morse, another veteran came by to do the same, telling Morse that he was “in a bad spot.”

Morse, who had similarly been very depressed after returning from Iraq, accepted the vet’s gun and decided to set up a system to hold and track guns being left for storage by troubled vets in his store’s inventory, telling them to pick up their firearms when they felt better. 

Within a year, other veterans dropped off guns “about a dozen times,” CBS reported. Since then, he has stored about 100 firearms.

Soon after the second vet asked for gun storage, Morse was contacted by Gala True, an associate professor at Louisiana State University School of Medicine who specializes in efforts to prevent veteran suicides.

According to CBS, she met with Morse in 2021 to work on a project she was coordinating with gun store owners who wanted to store firearm storage for those in crisis who, for a time, didn’t want their firearms in their homes. 

The Armory Project was launched in Louisiana that same year with three different gun shop owners interested in providing storage for firearms.

Through a Veterans Administration (VA) grant, True and her team helped the gun dealers build local networks and partnerships.

Mike Anestis, a suicide prevention expert, professor at Rutgers University, and  Executive director of the New Jersey Gun Violence Research Center and a professor at Rutgers University, said that in a country with roughly 400 million guns, the solution can’t be about banning firearms or stopping people from buying them.

And Anestis is absolutely correct. Voluntary outside storage, like preventing drunk driving by “taking away the car keys,” is a far better solution for preventing suicide by gunshot, than bans that violate our 2nd Amendment rights.

However, storing guns as part of a gun store’s inventory can cause liability issues.

So, as CBS reported, in July 2023 the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) got involved (in a good way this time). It issued an open letter to Federal Firearms Licensees (FFL) and gun shops advising how to legally and safely store firearms for these individuals. 

Providing gun storage lockers at the gun store that individuals can open themselves and put their firearms inside, is one option.

As the ATF letter states: “In this situation, an FFL does not “receive “or “acquire ” the firearm into its inventory, nor does the FFL assume control of the individual’s firearm.” This can reduce liability for gun shop owners like Morse, who want to provide outside storage for others in need. 

This is a great idea, and a great story. Look up The Armory Project and see if you can help with the effort in your state, city, or locality.

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

Biden Administration Sued Over Scheme To Revoke Trump Q Security Clearance

2
President Donald J. Trump is presented with a 10th Combat Aviation Brigade challenge coin following an air assault and gun rain demonstration at Fort Drum, New York, on August 13. The demonstration was part of President Trump's visit to the 10th Mountain Division (LI) to sign the National Defense Authorization Act of 2019, which increases the Army's authorized active-duty end strength by 4,000 enabling us to field critical capabilities in support of the National Defense Strategy. (U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Thomas Scaggs) 180813-A-TZ475-010

The non-profit public interest law firm Judicial Watch reports they filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Energy for “records about the retroactive termination of former President Donald Trump’s security clearance and/or access to classified information.”

Judicial Watch reports the lawsuit “cites Trump’s January 12, 2024, motion to compel discovery in his criminal prosecution in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, in which the former president asserts that DOE attempted to terminate his security clearance retroactively after his June 2023 indictment by Special Counsel Jack Smith.”

“It looks like the Department of Energy is trying to manufacture a criminal case,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “What are they hiding?”

Judicial Watch reports the lawsuit “points to the February 2024 response to Trump’s January 2024 motion in which Smith acknowledges the existence of a June 2023 memorandum prepared by an Energy Department official regarding the security clearance.”

“The Special Counsel’s office describes the memorandum’s contents and asserts that it had produced the record to Trump,” Judicial Watch reports. “Smith also acknowledges requesting and receiving additional ‘responsive’ records from DOE, including ‘approximately 30 pages of records and eight emails.’ Smith asserts that he was ‘now producing’ the 30 pages to Trump and withholding the eight emails.”

“Trump’s lawyers suggest in the January 2024 motion to compel discovery that Trump had a high-level security clearance as recently as 2023,” Judicial Watch notes.

“Lawyers for Trump say a government document from June 2023 still listed him with a “Q” clearance from the DOE. The document was dated a few weeks after prosecutors indicted Trump in the classified documents case,” Judicial Watch reports. “A ‘Q’ clearance refers to a type of security clearance handled by the Department of Energy, which holds classified information focused largely on nuclear secrets.”

Judicial Watch reports it “filed the lawsuit after the Energy Department failed to comply with a January 18, 2024, FOIA request for its records and communications concerning retroactively terminating Trump’s security clearance and/or access to classified information.”

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

Amanda Head: Even AI Agrees – Conservative Women Are More Attractive and Happier

2
Amanda Head

Who would ever want to be a liberal?

A new study found women who identify as conservatives are often more attractive and happier than their liberal counterparts…but is it true?

Watch Amanda explain the situation below:

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

Biden’s DHS Misinforms Congress About its Orwellian ‘Disinformation’ Board

4
The White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

ANALYSIS – As Republican senators try to conduct oversight over, and gain insight into, the outrageous, and supposedly now defunct, ‘Disinformation Governance Board’ at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Team Biden is blocking the senators at every step.

The board was dismantled under pressure in August following the recommendation of the Homeland Security Advisory Council. 

However, many are concerned that DHS will continue with its dangerously un-American efforts under a different name.

And now they are clearly afraid of what nefarious collusion with Big Tech the senators might uncover. 

So, as always, covering up is the next step when faced with hard questions and the great disinfectant called sunlight.

In this case, Team Biden is censoring its own documents which may describe its actions ‘prodding’ social media companies to censor conservative Americans under the guise of controlling ‘disinformation.’

Biden’s DHS essentially ‘misinformed’ Congress by totally redacting (censoring) large portions of documents requested by Sens. Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Josh Hawley of Missouri back in June.

These documents mostly related to the ‘Truth Board’s’ cozy relationship with social media platforms.

This issue is particularly critical now in light of recent revelations of collusion between the FBI and these same platforms, and the obscene partisan censorship done at Twitter in apparent coordination with the White House, as revealed by Elon Musk.

In a letter sent Thursday to embattled DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, Grassley and Hawley said the Department of Homeland Security heavily redacted documents they had requested six months ago.

The letter read: 

Based on our review of this material, it appears that many of the redactions are applied to pre-decisional and deliberative process material. We remind you that the oversight letters we send to the Executive Branch are signed in our capacity as sitting members of Congress, a separate and co-equal branch of government.

Newsmax reported:

Grassley and Hawley then said they would formally renew their requests to the department, as it is still “impossible to know the full extent to which various DHS components and offices are engaged in DHS’s ‘burgeoning’ counter-disinformation efforts.”

“Please provide full and complete responses to all questions contained in our June 7, 2022, letter,” the two wrote, adding that they would also like “a detailed description of DHS’s policy for responding to congressional oversight requests.”

The letter comes months after the White House canned the project due to substantial backlash, officially citing a recommendation from the Homeland Security Advisory Council, according to a press release.

“With the HSAC recommendations as a guide, the Department will continue to address threat streams that undermine the security of our country consistent with the law while upholding the privacy, civil rights and civil liberties of the American people and promoting transparency in our work,” the statement read.

Let’s hope that these senators will soon get the unredacted documents, so we can all learn what was really going on inside Biden’s dark attempt to create its own Orwellian ‘Ministry of Truth.’ 

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