Random

    Opinion

    Home Opinion Page 39

    Trump Shifts All Blame to Abortion for Midterm Losses

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    6
    Donald Trump via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    ANALYSIS – In typical Trump fashion, the former president just threw all pro-lifer conservatives under the bus to deflect any blame from himself for the weak ‘Red Trickle’ that was the 2022 election. But is he wrong?

    On November 9, I wrote about how both issues impacted the 2022 election losses. ‘Abortion and Trump tipped the scales.’

    Yes, some pro-life conservatives took the reasonable Supreme Court decision to give abortion decisions back to the states (where they belong), as a green light to push for the most aggressive anti-abortion restrictions they could.

    And this was a mistake. It only reinforced Democrat women’s fears and independent women’s doubts, fueling the abortion rights extremists to rally and independents to waver or vote Democrat.

    What they should have done is defend Dobbs and the Supreme Court while positioning the GOP as the reasonable party on abortion.

    Abortion on demand at all times under any circumstances, until the time of birth (and sometimes even beyond), is the extreme position.

    And most Americans oppose that insanity.

    “Let states decide. The left is extreme on abortion.” That’s how we should have played it.

    Sadly, too many on the right didn’t follow that playbook.

    So, when Trump stated on Truth Social on Sunday that it wasn’t his fault that “Republicans didn’t live up to expectations” in the 2022 midterm elections, he may be partly right.

    Instead, Trump blamed the “abortion issue,” writing that it was “poorly handled by many Republicans, especially those that firmly insisted on No Exceptions, even in the case of Rape, Incest, or Life of the Mother.”

    And that was true. Here I agree with Trump.

    When I ran for office in South Florida 10 years ago, I signed the National Right to Life Pledge, but even that staunchly pro-life organization made exceptions for rape, incest or the life of the mother.

    Now, however, Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, one of the nation’s leading pro-life groups, which spent tens of millions to mobilize the pro-life vote in the 2022 midterms, stated in response to Trump:

    The approach to winning on abortion in federal races, proven for a decade is this: state clearly the ambitious consensus pro-life view on abortion and contrast that with the extreme view of Democrat opponents. We look forward to hearing that position fully articulated by Mr. Trump and all presidential candidates.

    Their response was far from convincing. Taking the most extreme counterpoint to the left’s extreme position doesn’t win votes. It only makes you seem more extreme than the other guys.

    In an interview with Breitbart News last month, Trump said it best: “I think a lot of Republicans didn’t handle the abortion question properly. I think if you don’t have the three exceptions, it’s almost impossible in most parts of the country to win.”

    And even when Republicans were not asking for the most extreme abortion restrictions, the Democrats lied that they were.

    And this was also a failure of the GOP.

    The Democrats and leftist groups spent $468 million on abortion-related advertisements, whereas the Republican party focused its campaign advertising on inflation.

    While some grassroots conservatives were overzealous about rolling back abortion after Dobbs, the GOP establishment was afraid of the abortion issue altogether, ignored it and hoped it would just go away.

    But I think Trump is also wrong to take no blame himself. He did play a big part in the 2022 electoral defeat.

    As I wrote on November 9:

    But beyond the abortion issue, former president Trump likely played an outsized role in the red wave turning to a ripple.

    And as someone who has been a strong Trump supporter and voted for Trump twice, I believe this sentiment [Trump was part of the problem] has validity.

    Continuous ranting about election fraud in 2020 makes the future about the past.

    And forcefully demanding GOP loyalty to one man doesn’t help either.

    It also makes everything about Trump rather than conservative ideas, policies, and candidates.

    Nothing mobilizes the Democrats, the media and the left like Trump.

    Of course, the title of my November piece could have given a clue. It was: “Is It Time for the GOP to Dump Trump?”

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

    Final Bit of Democrat Insanity at End of 2022

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    0
    Pixabay free images

    ANALYSIS – As we end yet another crazy year, we have a new report on how Democrats continue to be the crazy party. 

    Despite substantial scientific evidence to the contrary, a majority of Democrats still favor masking toddlers to battle the spread of COVID.

    A recent I&I/TIPP Poll showed this mass insanity when 56% of Democrats said they believed masking children under the age of 5 is still a good idea.

    In contrast, only 24% of Republicans and 31% of independents believed that masking toddlers is a good idea.

    When asked if masking toddlers was a bad idea, as much of the scientific evidence now shows, 58% of Republicans and 38% of independents said they think it is a bad idea.

    And only 24% of Democrats thought the same way.

    But the divide goes deeper, with ideology, race, and ethnicity playing big roles as well.

    The Blaze reported:

    When respondents were grouped by ideology rather than party, there was a similar divide: 56% of conservatives thought it was a bad idea; 31% of alleged conservatives supported the initiative. Liberals again majoritively (54%) supported covering children’s faces.

    Ideology and party were not the only differentiators.

    Only 33% of white Americans said it was a good idea, whereas 48% of black and Hispanic respondents supported masking kids. On the other hand, 44% of white respondents and 28% of black and Hispanic respondents were opposed.

    When it came to opposing the idea, 39% of women were opposed — two points higher than their male counterparts.

    The Blaze continued:

    I&I intimated that what might partially account for the significant ideological split between the right and the left on the matter of masking kids is media and activist suppression of legitimate medical studies putting the efficacy of masking children in doubt.

    Numerous studies questioned the effectiveness of masking in protecting from serious COVID effects.

    As The Blaze explains, these studies highlight the adverse impact masks have on toddlers’ communication skills and the relative unlikelihood of children becoming severely sick from COVID.

    The Blaze also notes that neither the World Health Organization (WHO) nor the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control recommends masking little kids.

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

    Agent Who Took Bullet For Reagan Backs Secret Service After WHCA Dinner Chaos

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    4
    By Series: Reagan White House Photographs, 1/20/1981 - 1/20/1989Collection: White House Photographic Collection, 1/20/1981 - 1/20/1989 - https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75856639, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=96625804

    A Secret Service agent who literally took a bullet for President Ronald Reagan is now defending the agency after the shocking armed breach at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner.

    Tim McCarthy — the agent wounded during the 1981 assassination attempt on Reagan — says critics need to cool it.

    “I think we need to ratchet down the rhetoric just a little bit and give the Secret Service at the moment quite a bit of credit for doing a hell of a good job,” McCarthy said on NewsNation Live.

    That’s no small endorsement.

    McCarthy was among the agents protecting Reagan outside the Washington Hilton in March 1981 when would-be assassin John Hinckley Jr. opened fire. Reagan was hit by a bullet that ricocheted off his limousine, piercing his lung and causing massive internal bleeding. McCarthy, along with Press Secretary James Brady and others, was also struck — Brady left permanently disabled.

    Now, more than four decades later, McCarthy is weighing in on another high-stakes moment at the very same hotel.

    On Saturday night, an armed suspect stormed the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, where President Donald Trump was in attendance — sparking panic and fierce backlash online over security failures.

    But McCarthy says the system worked.

    “This guy really didn’t get too far,” he said. “He ran through the metal detectors… exchanged gunfire… wasn’t even on the same floor… and was tackled by an agent, never got to the stairs.”

    Despite viral outrage — and even the suspect himself claiming there was “no damn security” — McCarthy emphasized the layered defense that stopped the threat cold.

    “Now, security is in layers,” he explained, detailing how multiple levels of resistance stood between the gunman and the president, including counter-assault teams and SWAT units.

    Bottom line: the shooter never got close.

    “Security was tested, security responded, and at this point it did pretty well,” McCarthy said.

    The Trump White House appears to agree.

    Officials praised the Secret Service for quickly evacuating the president, vice president, and cabinet, while Chief of Staff Susie Wiles is set to review protocols going forward.

    Still, critics have questioned whether more could have been done — including calls to lock down the entire hotel.

    McCarthy dismissed that idea outright.

    “Well, try finding a hotel with a ballroom if you’re going to shut the hotel down,” he said. “You’re not going to find one. No one’s going to want to do that.”

    He also noted that security included multiple layers — possibly more than the standard three — and that the threat never reached the ballroom floor.

    For McCarthy, who lived through one of the darkest days in presidential security history, the verdict is clear:

    “So far, based on what I know, I’m pretty satisfied with what the Secret Service did on this occasion.”

    The Washington Hilton hotel said is a statement Monday it was following “stringent” Secret Service protocols during Saturday’s White House Correspondents’ Association dinner.

    “The ​hotel was operating under stringent security ​protocols for the property as directed by the ‌U.S. ⁠Secret Service, which led security,” a hotel spokesperson said in a statement, according to Reuters. 

    The spokesperson reportedly added that the Secret Service coordinated with numerous security teams, including the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) in addition to hotel security. 

    John Kennedy here. The last fundraising deadline passed — and we came up short. Now the woke crowd is celebrating, saying “Kennedy’s finished.” Let’s prove them wrong. Chip in $25, $50, or whatever you can to close the gap and keep fighting.

    Amanda Head: You Won’t Believe How Many Adults Still Mooch Off Their Parents

    By
    Amanda Head
    -
    1

    It’s unbelievable how many adults are content still mooching off of their parents instead of being self-sufficient.

    Watch Amanda break down the situation below:

    Biden Buddies at DOJ Refused to Help Fellow US Attorney on Hunter Case

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    2
    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)

    ANALYSIS – FBI agent bombshell – Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss, now a Special Counsel, was the lead prosecutor investigating Hunter Biden for alleged tax offenses. 

    He is accused of slow-rolling the investigation, and he contrived a sweetheart plea deal that would have essentially given Hunter nothing more than a slap on the wrist.

    That deal blew up in June, as I have written previously, TWICE, thanks to both GOP pressure and an astute judge who questioned the shady deal.

    Now it turns out, his fellow U.S. Attorneys for D.C. and the Central District of California at the Department of Justice (DoJ), also refused to work with Weiss in his investigation of the First Son. 

    This, according to an FBI agent who recently testified before the House Judiciary Committee.

    It is bad timing for Hunter, coming as a Delaware grand jury has finally indicted Biden Jr. on felony gun charges, right before the statute of limitations, like those on two years of tax evasion, ran out (as was previously intended?).

    It also shows that the Hunter buck stopped with Merrick Garland, the Biden Attorney General, not Weiss.

    The FBI agent corroborated IRS whistleblower Gary Shapley’s earlier testimony about how the Hunter investigation was mishandled at DoJ.

    Based on transcripts of his testimony, the agent reportedly stated that Matthew Graves, U.S. Attorney for D.C., and E. Martin Estrada, U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California, “refused to work” with Weiss on charges against Hunter Biden in their jurisdictions.

    When asked specifically about Graves, the agent said: “I remember learning at some point in the investigation that Mr. Weiss would have to go through his other processes because the U.S. Attorney’s Offices had, I guess, in that sense, using that terminology, wasn’t going to partner.”

    Both these federal prosecutors were proven partisan Democrats. One was a Biden loyalist.

    Graves was appointed D.C. U.S. Attorney by Joe Biden in November 2021. Previously he worked for Biden’s presidential campaign and donated to it repeatedly as well.

    Estrada was appointed U.S. Attorney for California’s Central District in September 2022. Previously he had made donations to Vice President Kamala Harris’ Democratic Senate campaign.

    This is serious stuff.

    It could also show that Weiss lied to, or at least misled, Congress when he said in written testimony to Senator Lindsey Graham July 10 that “I’ve never been denied the authority to bring charges in any jurisdiction.”

    The blatant ‘obstruction’ by these partisan Democrat hack prosecutors should cause concern and raise questions about the integrity of the Justice Department under Biden.

    It is also adding more damaging evidence of Biden’s corruption as the Hunter prosecution continues, and the House launches its impeachment inquiry of Joe Biden.

    But it says a lot more. By refusing to press charges in their respective jurisdictions, these Biden buddies passed the buck to their boss, not Weiss.

    And who is their boss – Merrick Garland, Biden’s Attorney General.

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

    Fix The NSC: A Warning & Roadmap For Trump’s Second Term

    By
    Alex Muse
    -
    0
    [Photo Cred: Office of the President of the United States, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons]

    A Call to Action: Reforming the National Security Council

    Joshua Steinman, the former senior director for cyber on President Trump’s National Security Council (NSC), has issued a stark warning to the incoming president that demands immediate attention. Steinman, who loyally served from Trump’s first day in office to his last, cautions that mistakes in NSC staffing could spell disaster for the administration’s second term, leading to either ineffectiveness or outright betrayal. His insights form a compelling argument for a complete overhaul of the NSC as the cornerstone of Trump’s efforts to govern effectively.

    The NSC, as Steinman explains, is not merely a bureaucratic appendage. It is the quarterback of the White House—the entity tasked with ensuring that the president’s directives are executed seamlessly across the vast machinery of the federal government. “If the president is the owner of the football team, the NSC is the quarterback,” he asserts, underscoring the centrality of this institution in driving the administration’s policy agenda. And yet, Steinman’s concerns suggest that the team surrounding this quarterback may not be up to the task.

    Reflecting on Trump’s first term, Steinman identifies a critical error: the decision to retain approximately 50% of the NSC staff from the Obama administration. This hesitation to implement a sweeping purge, according to Steinman, allowed disloyal actors to undermine Trump’s policies. Some of these holdovers allegedly continued to operate under Obama-era guidance until explicitly instructed otherwise. Steinman’s message is clear: “Removing people like this isn’t personal; it’s just prudent.”

    The stakes are high. Steinman contrasts Trump’s initial approach with the swift and decisive action taken by President Biden, who executed a comprehensive purge of Trump-aligned NSC staff upon taking office. This move ensured that Biden’s team could implement his agenda without interference from ideological adversaries. Critics labeled Biden’s actions a “purge” and raised concerns about the politicization of traditionally non-partisan roles, but his administration’s determination to align its personnel with its policies proved effective in consolidating its power.

    Steinman’s critique does not stop at holdovers. He raises alarms about new hires, questioning their loyalty and expertise. Among those rumored to join Trump’s team is Adam Howard, GOP Staff Director for the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), who is set to take the critical role of senior director for intelligence programs. Steinman questions whether Howard’s background equips him to confront potential interference from the intelligence community—a task vital to ensuring Trump’s agenda is not derailed.

    The urgency of Steinman’s warning lies in the fundamental truth that personnel is policy. For Trump’s administration to succeed, the NSC must be staffed with individuals who are not only loyal to his vision but also possess the subject-matter expertise to navigate the complexities of their roles. Steinman’s concerns about Anne Neuberger, the Biden-appointed NSC cybersecurity director, exemplify this need. Her alignment with policies on artificial intelligence and tech censorship could undermine Trump’s objectives, should she remain in place.

    Trump’s response to these challenges is beginning to take shape. Key appointments to his NSC include:

    • Michael Waltz, National Security Advisor: A Republican Congressman and retired Army Green Beret with a hardline stance on China.
    • Alex Wong, Deputy National Security Advisor: A seasoned diplomat who oversaw North Korea policy during Trump’s first term.
    • Sebastian Gorka, Senior Director for Counterterrorism: A known advocate for robust counterterrorism strategies.
    • Brian McCormack, Senior Advisor: An energy consultant focusing on energy security.
    • Andrew Peek, Middle East Policy Adviser: A seasoned expert on the region’s complexities.

    While these appointments reflect a renewed emphasis on loyalty and alignment, Steinman’s cautionary tale lingers. The success of Trump’s second term hinges on avoiding the missteps of the first. The NSC’s ability to serve as an effective quarterback depends entirely on the quality of its staff. As Steinman aptly puts it, “The Intel Senior Director position is one of the most CRITICAL posts in U.S. Government.”

    The broader implications of Steinman’s warning extend beyond Trump’s presidency. The debate over Biden’s NSC purge highlighted the tension between ensuring policy alignment and maintaining non-partisan governance. Critics, including the Heritage Foundation, argued that Biden’s actions undermined the apolitical nature of advisory roles, while supporters contended that loyalty is essential for effective governance. Trump’s administration must navigate this delicate balance, prioritizing mission alignment without descending into the partisanship that critics decry.

    As Trump prepares to assume office once more, the lessons of his first term and Biden’s purge are clear: the NSC must be reimagined, restructured, and resolutely loyal to the President’s agenda. Failure to act decisively could jeopardize the very goals Trump has championed—from ending unnecessary conflicts to revitalizing the economy. Steinman’s call to action is both a warning and a roadmap: “Fix the NSC, fix the presidency.”

    Sponsored by the John Milton Freedom Foundation, a nonprofit dedicated to helping independent journalists overcome formidable challenges in today’s media landscape and bring crucial stories to you.

    Biden Defends China’s ‘COVID Freedom’ Protests, But Not U.S. and Canadian Ones 

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    0
    The White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

    ANALYSIS – The massive protests against the communist Chinese dictatorship, and its draconian anti-COVID repression continues.

    And so does the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) crackdown.

    As these Chinese ‘freedom protests’ grow and spread, hypocritical Western leaders, who until recently pursued their own, less harsh, COVID crackdowns and vaccine mandates, are showing their support.

    Among them, is Joe Biden. 

    A Monday White House statement in response to anti-lockdown demonstrations that swept through major Chinese cities reads:

    We think it’s going to be very difficult for the People’s Republic of China to be able to contain this virus through their zero COVID strategy. We’ve long said everyone has a right to peacefully protest, here in the United States and around the world. This includes the PRC.

    Sadly, while he could be far more aggressive in his response to China’s COVID repression, Biden was doing just the opposite with earlier Canadian and American COVID crackdown protests.

    Justin Trudeau’s authoritarian overkill in response to Canadian truckers was particularly egregious.

    An unquestionably authoritarian move, it received criticism from the left, right, and center.

    The leftist Canadian Civil Liberties Association called Trudeau’s actions “unnecessary, unjustifiable and unconstitutional.” 

    Reason Magazine’s J.D. Tuccille said at the time that Trudeau had a “bad case of China-envy.”

    Yet, Biden wholeheartedly backed Trudeau’s repression.

    As Reason explains:

    The Biden administration urged the Canadian government to use whatever means it had to reopen border crossings barricaded by the so-called “Freedom convoy” and get a handle on the protests.

    That’s according to revelations of an ongoing Canadian inquiry into Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s unprecedented invocation of Canada’s Emergencies Act.

    Why was Biden so gung-ho about Trudeau’s crushing of the peaceful trucker freedom protests?

    Reason argues that in part:

    Biden embraced an expansive view of his executive powers to effectively mandate vaccines for millions of Americans. That contributed to his support for the suppression of Canadian anti-mandate demonstrations. 

    REASON added: “The only people who seem to support Trudeau’s use of emergency powers against peaceful protestors are the prime minister himself—and the Biden White House.”

    And Biden’s strong backing of Trudeau’s repression makes his current defense of China’s protests all the more laughable.

    It also erodes his moral authority to lecture the Chinese government now on the right of the people to peaceful protest.

    As Reason concludes: “It’s also a lesson in how restrictions on freedom in one country can damage it everywhere.” 

    When America allows the crushing of political dissent at home and promotes repression by its liberal northern neighbor, it not only hurts us, it fuels more repression among our enemies.

    This only helps authoritarianism grow globally.

    Amanda Head: Drag Star Spews Hate About Traditional Families

    By
    Amanda Head
    -
    2

    If you’re in search of a New Years resolution let it be to stop inadvertently supporting the left’s wild attacks on the family.

    It’s time to fight back and this is one easy step you can take to dismantle the radical left.

    Watch Amanda break down the latest controversy below.

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

    What About the Federal Investigations on Biden’s Corruption?

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    3
    The White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

    ANALYSIS – We are rightfully covering all aspects of the ongoing legal proceedings against former president Donald Trump, especially the most recent federal indictment. 

    But we also need to ask – what about the federal investigations into Joe and Hunter Biden? They are potentially far more serious.

    Bill Barr, Attorney General under Trump, said the protracted investigation into Hunter Biden, which is being led by U.S. Attorney David Weiss, is damaging the nation.

    “I think it’s time to fish or cut bait and find out what actually happened in that investigation,” Barr said, according to The Blaze.

    The Hunter investigation has the strong potential to also implicate Joe Biden criminally, including credible whistleblower allegations that the senior Biden took a $5 million bribe from the Chinese.

    That would be a far worse crime than anything Trump has been accused of.

    But Democrats are quick to dismiss these serious accusations, and in some cases even lie about them.

    Case in point, a confidential human source (CHS) allegations that Biden had been involved in a criminal bribery scheme.

    After meeting with the FBI, where they showed Democrat Rep. Jamie Raskin and House Oversight Committee Chairman, Republican James Comer, a document detailing the allegations, Raskin dismissed the whole thing, and apparently lied about it.

    As The Blaze reported: “Raskin, the committee’s top Democrat, claimed the Justice Department had investigated the allegations in 2020 but decided not to move further because then-U.S. Attorney Scott Brady ‘found no evidence to corroborate’ them.

    He also claimed information against Biden was given to the FBI by Rudy Giuliani, a high-profile, if slightly discredited, Trump loyalist.

    In an interview on Fox News, Barr, who led the Department of Justice (DOJ) when the whistleblower allegations were made, disputed Raskin’s comments, saying the Democrat was “confused,” and essentially called him a liar.

    According to the Blaze:

    Barr said he assigned Brady the task of vetting the document to determine its credibility. He established this “intake process,” he explained, because there were a number of ongoing investigations related to the Biden family and he wanted to avoid “proliferating investigations around the country going in to the election year, all related to the Bidens.”

    “We also wanted to protect the integrity of the investigations that were going on,” Barr said. “So this was a screening, a clearinghouse function to check evidence out before sending it to the ongoing investigations.”

    Regarding Raskin’s claim that the document contained information provided by Rudy Giuliani. That is just flatly untrue, he said.

    Barr added, “It was stuff that was developed within the department and the FBI from [a] confidential human source. And that information was checked out and it was determined that it was not likely to have been disinformation.” 

    Meanwhile, Biden decided to joke about the serious allegations about Chinese bribery.

    When confronted by a reporter at the White House who asked about them, saying “Congresswoman Nancy Mace says there’s damning evidence in the FBI file that you sold out the country,” Biden replied: “Where’s the money?” adding, “I’m joking. It’s a bunch of malarkey.”

    The GOP Congresswoman quickly responded: “[W]e don’t find selling out your country funny. Prove us wrong by releasing your and your family’s unredacted bank records. The FBI can’t protect you forever.”

    She went on to list the names of businesses the Biden family allegedly used as “shell companies” to conceal funds received from foreign nationals.

    Comer earlier had explained: “Most of these companies were limited liability companies formed during Joe Biden’s vice presidency.” 

    “The bank records show the Biden family, their associates, and their companies received over $10 million from foreign nationals and their companies.”

    According to Fox News, an executive with Burisma Holdings, the Ukrainian natural gas firm where Hunter Biden served as a board member, told the FBI’s source the payoff was to be divided: “$5 million for one Biden, $5 million for the other Biden.” 

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

    Joe Biden (aka JRB Ware’) Facing ‘Inferno of Allegations’ – What’s Next?

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    3
    Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    ANALYSIS – If you only followed establishment news, you would think that only former president Donald Trump is in a heap of legal trouble. Well, regardless of whether Trump’s legal woes are justified or a witch hunt by a weaponized Department of Justice (DoJ) and politicized local prosecutors, he isn’t the only president in increasingly hot water.

    Whether it’s through his son Hunter, or by his own doing, Joe Biden is also facing what one congressman called an “inferno of allegations.”

    Pennsylvania Republican and House Oversight Committee member Scott Perry said on a Newsmax TV interview on Thursday that where there’s smoke there’s fire, and Joe Biden has “gotten himself into an inferno of allegations and credible claims of influence peddling that seems like it’s filled with probable cause.”

    Newsmax reported:

    Perry made the comments on “Rob Schmitt Tonight” in a discussion about the president’s use of at least one email alias when he was vice president. The Oversight Committee has demanded that the National Archives turn over unredacted material related to the alias and its use that overlaps with Hunter Biden’s time in Ukraine.

    “I think it’s really long past time where the Oversight Committee and the Congress itself to play hardball with these agencies that somehow think that this information that belongs to the American people somehow solely belongs to them as though it’s their personal possession,” Perry told Schmitt.

    Joe Biden’s use of email aliases during his time as vice president is the latest bombshell to come from investigations into Hunter’s shady foreign business deals.

    As the New York Post reported:

    President Biden used at least three pseudonyms during his vice presidency to send messages to his son Hunter concerning both family and official government business — including meetings with Ukrainian leaders, emails found on the first son’s abandoned laptop show.

    Then-Vice President Biden emailed Hunter under the aliases “Robin Ware,” “Robert L. Peters” and “JRB Ware” between 2014 and 2016, keeping his son abreast of scheduled talks with then-Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko and Kyiv Prime Minister Volodymyr Groysman, among other communications The Post first revealed in 2021.

    The elder Biden had one of his aides, John Flynn, send his daily schedule to the private email address “[email protected]” at least 10 times between May 18 and June 15, 2016, copying Hunter on a May 26 message with a note about an “8.45am prep for 9am phonecall [sic]

    Biden had pressured Poroshenko five months earlier to fire Ukrainian prosecutor general Viktor Shokin, who was investigating the natural gas company Burisma Holdings, where Hunter earned roughly $1 million per year while serving on the board between 2014 and 2019.

    Joe Biden also used the “JRB Ware” alias in 2016 to discuss plans for the Penn Biden Centerin Washington, DC, and where improperly kept classified material was found late last year.

    The revelation of these Biden aliases has prompted House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) to ask the National Archives to turn over unredacted records where Biden relied on the aliases when communicating with his son Hunter and his son’s business partners Eric Schwerin and Devon Archer.

    Archer told the committee on July 31 that Joe Biden got on phone calls with his son’s foreign business associates nearly two dozen times.

    Schwerin also visited the Old Executive Office Building to meet with then-Vice President Biden around the time the Obama-Biden administration was making big changes to US-Ukraine policy.

    So, what should happen next? Well, Congressman Perry has an answer for that.

    Newsmax quoted Perry as saying:

    I think the subpoenas have to start. I think the impeachment inquiry is overdue again. We have probable cause. I think in any other criminal case instance right now that this would be completely fulfilling the probable cause requirement.

    I think it’s our duty to ferret this out, so the American people know about their president, whether they can trust him or not.

    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