As Americans continue to wait for official midterm results to trickle in Republicans are already diving themselves into two camps: Ron DeSantis or Donald Trump.
Who are you siding with?
Watch Amanda break it down below.
ANALYSIS – After reportedly imploding earlier Wednesday, Hunter Biden’s sweetheart criminal plea deal then appeared to be ‘back on’ after being revised.
But then the revised deal imploded again when it was blocked by the federal judge overseeing the case.
It now may be on life support.
Prosecutors said in court that Hunter Biden failed to pay between $1.1 million and $1.5 million in taxes when they were due.
Questioning from Judge Maryellen Noreika, a Trump appointee, during Biden’s hearing, uncovered that the Department of Justice (DoJ) and Biden’s legal team were not on the same page regarding the scope of the deal.
Biden’s team believed it was more sweeping than it was intended.
Hunter Biden had been expected to plead guilty to 2017 and 2018 misdemeanor tax charges Wednesday in a Delaware court, in part it seemed, to avoid jail time on a separate felony gun charge.
Under an earlier agreement with federal prosecutors in Delaware, the First Son has entered a pretrial diversion program for the gun charge, which allows defendants to avoid a conviction or prison time.
Noreika said she had “concerns” about the parties seemingly linking the tax plea agreement to resolving a felony gun charge.
However, the deal was then revised.
The new deal was going to cover Biden’s drug use and tax-related conduct from 2014 to 2019 (not just 2017-2018) but would not cover Biden for any other matters or crimes.
This is critical since the GOP-led House Oversight Committee is currently investigating Biden’s shady foreign business dealings and how Joe Biden is connected to the money that came to Hunter from overseas sources including Ukraine and China.
News of the sweetheart deal in June sparked accusations of favorable treatment for the president’s son from Republicans who have accused the younger Biden of a myriad of crimes and improprieties, including influence-peddling abroad.
Under the revised deal the DoJ could now charge Biden in the future for violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) since he lobbied on behalf of foreign governments without registering as a Foreign Agent under FARA.
America First Legal (AFL) is suing the DoJ for allegedly failing to require the president’s son to register for FARA during the Obama administration.
Republican Sen. Josh Hawley told CNN that court proceedings today on Biden’s plea deal shows that the deal was always flawed and that additional charges could be coming.
CNN reported:
“It’s very telling that the judge intervened here and said basically, ‘No, I’m not going to approve some sweeping blanket deal,’” the Republican from Missouri said. “I mean, that tells you the court has serious concerns about other potential charges here, and also the scope of the deal, which has seemed outrageous from the beginning.”
He added, “This, I think, signals that they’re still very much as potential for prosecution forward.”
Hawley said that Biden should not receive special treatment, as whistleblowers have alleged. “He should be treated like any other person under the law. That’s my view on him.”
But the judge wasn’t satisfied with the revised deal either. “What if it is unconstitutional?” Judge Noreika asked. “I’m trying to exercise due diligence and consideration to make sure we don’t make a misstep.”
The tax charges could carry a sentence of up to 18 months, but Hunter Biden is unlikely to face prison time because he lacks a criminal history and has accepted responsibility for his actions.
As part of the deal, prosecutorsare recommending probation, but ultimately the judge has the sole authority to decide his punishment.
The hearing ended with Biden pleading not guilty ‘for now’ with the judge asking both sides to file additional briefs explaining the plea deal’s legal structure.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
A new Associated Press poll finds Americans are almost evenly split on whether former President Donald Trump should be sentenced to prison after being found guilty of falsifying business records in New York.
“The public is divided over whether Donald Trump should be sentenced to prison for his felony conviction for falsifying business records in the hush money case,” the AP reports. “Opinions on the conviction itself have remained stable in the weeks since the decision was announced on May 30 with nearly half approving of the jury’s decision and about a quarter disapproving. The public is also divided on whether Trump has received fair treatment from the legal system.”
Trump, convicted in June, is scheduled to be sentenced Sept. 18, just weeks ahead of the November election. Experts predict Trump will likely receive probation and a fine, but a prison sentence is a distinct possibility.
The AP/NORC poll, conducted June 20-24, finds 48 percent believe Trump should receive a prison sentence, while 50 percent disagree. That gap is within the poll’s margin of error, meaning Americans are essentially evenly split.
Among independent voters, who will decide the election, 50 percent believe Trump should be imprisoned while 46 percent disagree.
While Americans are split on whether Trump should go to prison, the number who support Trump’s conviction outnumber those who oppose it by nearly a two-to-one margin.
The poll finds 46 percent of Americans support the jury’s decision to convict Trump, while 27 percent disapprove and 25 percent are unsure.
Among independents, 32 percent agree with the conviction, 21 percent disagree and 47 percent are unsure.
The nationwide poll was conducted June 20-24, 2024 using the AmeriSpeak® Panel, the probability-based panel of NORC at the University of Chicago.
The poll, using online and telephone interviews using landlines and cell phones, was conducted with 1,088 adults. The margin of sampling error is +/- 4.0 percentage points.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk.
Americans may soon learn more about how a FBI agent worked with a liberal group to target President Donald Trump in a criminal investigation.
The non-profit public interest law firm Judicial Watch announced in a statement it “filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice for communications between former Assistant Special Agent in Charge Timothy Thibault and the anti-Trump organization American Oversight.”
“It’s a shame that we must sue to get these records about how the Biden gang at the FBI and DOJ tried to rig an election by jailing Trump for disputing the 2020 election,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “It’s past time for these institutions to focus on transparency under law, so the American people can know the full truth on the lawfare attack perpetrated on Trump.”
Judicial Watch reports it filed the suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia “after the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) failed to respond to a January 31, 2025, FOIA request for:”
Records and communications between Timothy Thibault, former [Assistant Special Agent in Charge, Washington Field Office] and the non-profit organization American Oversight, 1030 15th St. NW, B255, Washington, D.C. 20005, email domain: @americanoversight. The search terms for this request are a) Trump b) Electors c) Investigation d) election
According to Judicial Watch, “in July 2022, U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) reportedly warned then-Attorney General Merrick Garland that Thibault and an official in the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section, Richard Pilger, were ‘deeply involved in the decisions to open and pursue election-related investigations against President Trump. At the time, whistleblowers told Grassley that the Thibault-Pilger investigation’s predicating document was based on information from “liberal nonprofit American Oversight.”’ Thibault retired in August 2022.”
Grassley and Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) have revealed in a statement that:
Internal FBI emails and predicating documents provided to Grassley and released jointly by the two senators show Timothy Thibault, a former FBI Assistant Special Agent in Charge (ASAC) who was forced to retire from the Bureau after Grassley exposed his public anti-Trump bias, authored the initial language for what ultimately became Jack Smith’s federal case against Trump regarding the 2020 presidential election. Records show Thibault essentially opened and approved his own investigation.
Judicial Watch reports American Oversight describes itself as “founded in 2017 in response to the unprecedented challenges that the Trump administration posed to our nation’s democratic ideals and institutions.…” Earlier this year, Politico described it as, “A left-leaning watchdog group … working to gather materials that could feed Congressional investigations into the Trump administration.”
The U.S. Supreme Court is in a sorry state of affairs.
One liberal-leaning justice just can’t seem to shake this obsession with race… and the implications are dangerous for the country.
Watch Amanda break down the problem below:
ANALYSIS – In an unexpected, but long overdue move, the Pentagon has stated it will no longer work with directors if their movies will be censored by Beijing. This follows directly on the heels of Vietnam banning the movie ‘Barbie’ over its inclusion of a China-friendly map of the South China Sea.
That movie’s producers apparently caved to Chinese pressure and included the map showing China essentially owning the South China Sea, which it does not, despite its claims. And Vietnam wasn’t happy.
But, as I previously wrote, this Chinese censorship problem really exploded with last year’s release of Tom Cruise’s blockbuster “Top Gun: Maverick.”
And now the Pentagon, thanks to GOP Senator Ted Cruz, has made it clear it now bans any military assistance to directors who plan to comply (or will likely comply) with censorship demands from the Chinese regime in order to distribute their movie in China.
In trailers for the ‘Maverick’ film shown in 2019, the flags of Taiwan and Japan had been removed from Capt. Pete “Maverick” Mitchell’s flight jacket worn by Cruise in the 1986 original “Top Gun” movie.
The flags were part of a Far East Cruise patch commemorating the 1963-64 deployment by the USS Galveston off Japan and Taiwan. In the preview clip for the movie in 2019, those two historically accurate flags were replaced by generic nonsensical symbols.
This shameless kowtowing was an apparent attempt to appease Chinese investor Tencent. But after serious blowback in the U.S. — and after Tencent reportedly dropped its investment in the film – the flags were restored in the final version of the film.
In another example, Chinese government censors actually pushed the producers of “Spider-man: No Way Home” to remove the Statue of Liberty, according to Puck. This, likely due to its association with the Tiananmen Square protests.
Thankfully, the studio did not comply, and that movie wasn’t shown in China.
The Defense Department updated its rules for working with movie studios after Cruz (R-Texas) inserted language, known as the SCRIPT Act. into the fiscal 2023 defense policy bill.
Cruz has strongly condemned Beijing’s censorship of Hollywood films.
“What does it say to the world when Maverick is scared of the Chinese communists?” he said at the time.
The latest Top Gun movie also reportedly showed us a peek at what might be the SR-72 – the super-secret experimental hypersonic spy plane under development by Lockheed Martin. It was called the ‘Darkstar’ in the film.
Providing more context, Politico reported:
According to a new Defense Department document obtained by POLITICO, filmmakers who want the U.S. military to help with their projects must now pledge that they won’t let Beijing alter those films.
The DOD “will not provide production assistance when there is demonstrable evidence that the production has complied or is likely to comply with a demand from the Government of the People’s Republic of China … to censor the content of the project in a material manner to advance the national interest of the People’s Republic of China,” the document reads.
Hollywood and the Defense Department have enjoyed a symbiotic relationship for decades. The Pentagon has allowed filmmakers to shoot their projects on military bases, Navy ships, or other locations, and weighs in on filmmaking processes. The military benefits from positive portrayals of service members, and moviemakers benefit from authentic settings and technical expertise.
But as China’s ruling Communist Party has developed increasingly advanced censorship and surveillance tools, countless American companies — including Hollywood studios — have sought to comply with Beijing’s demands while attempting to dodge stateside pushback.
However, from now on, producers of films greenlighted by the Defense Department must notify the Pentagon “in writing of such a censorship demand, including the terms of such demand, and whether the project has complied or is likely to comply with a demand for such censorship.”
But not just that. DoD will also weigh any “verifiable information” from people not involved in the production who indicate that producers could comply with a censorship demand.
So, hopefully Hollywood will stop caving to China’s blackmail, or risk losing access to their much-loved Pentagon collaboration.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
Beloved beer brand Budweiser seems to be going through an identity crisis…
Over the weekend, Bud Light announced its partnership with trans social media influencer Dylan Mulvaney. The partnership has been met with shock and intense criticism.
Watch Amanda explain the latest controversy below:
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
A group of United States senators are sounding the alarm on an effort by President Joe Biden to give illegal aliens free taxpayer-funded housing while thousands of American veterans are homeless.
To head off announced plans by the Biden administration to give free housing to illegal aliens, U.S. Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) introduced the Heroes Over Aliens Act to “prohibit the use of federal dollars to house illegal aliens in the United States when veterans remain homeless,.”
“Veterans sacrificed for our country and deserve our thanks and support. The Heroes Over Aliens Act would prevent the Biden administration from prioritizing illegal immigrants over homeless heroes,” said Kennedy.
Sens. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), Roger Marshall (R-Kan.), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) and Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) are cosponsoring the legislation.
“With so many Americans, especially veterans, struggling thanks to Joe Biden’s failed economic policies, our country should not spend money housing the millions of migrants that his administration let cross our border. This bill will ensure that not a cent can be spent on shelter for illegal immigrants until our veterans are taken care of first,” said Cotton.
“In Joe Biden’s America, illegal immigrants are prioritized over our veterans. As homelessness increases across the nation, it is unthinkable that taxpayer funds are used to house those who break the law instead of American heroes. It’s common sense to stop all federal funding for this offensive practice while there are still thousands of veterans living on the streets,” said Blackburn.
“The Biden administration’s backwards border policies prioritize housing assistance for illegal aliens while neglecting homeless veterans. We must take care of each and every one of our own American heroes before using federal funds to house undocumented migrants,” said Cramer.
The bill is in response to announced plans by the Biden administration to give illegal aliens housing at federal taxpayer expense, after some liberal cities and states have ordered hotels to give rooms to illegals and reportedly kicked out veterans and schoolchildren so government facilities can be used as illegal alien housing.
“On June 12, 2023, August 21, 2023, and April 12, 2024, the Biden administration announced three separate actions to fund housing for immigrants—the majority of whom crossed the border illegally,” Kennedy’s office reports.
“The Department of Housing and Urban Development’s 2023 Annual Homeless Assessment Report found that there were 35,574 homeless veterans living in the U.S.—a 7.4 percent increase from the previous report and the largest increase in 12 years,” Kennedy’s office adds.
“The Biden administration’s open border policies have consumed federal and local resources and made it harder for states and localities to address veteran homelessness effectively,” Kennedy’s office concludes.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
Christine Anderson, a member of the European Parliament and a member of Germany’s conservative Alternative for Germany (AfD) party says that freedom, Democracy, and the rule of law are on the brink of collapse in Western nations and the Covid-19 pandemic is partially to blame.
“We are now violating what we thought was the foundation our societies were built on,” Anderson said.
Anderson recently completed a tour in Canada visiting the Freedom Convoy and decided to take the opportunity to attend this year’s Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) which is known to host thousands of conservative supporters, activists, and lawmakers to draw attention to the threats currently facing Western democracy.
The Freedom Convoy is a series of ongoing protests and blockades in Canada against Covid-19 vaccine mandates and restrictions. The convoy was originally created to protest vaccine mandates for crossing the United States border but later evolved into a protest about oppressive Covid-19 restrictions in general.
The German politician noted that her concerns are focused on Western democracy, admitting she doesn’t expect governments in China, North Korea, or even Russia to value ideals like freedom and rule of law.
“I hold the Western democracies to a higher standard, but we are now violating what we thought was the foundation our societies were built on and a really scary thing is that all these Western democracies seem to be in lock-step right now with whatever agenda they are trying to implement and push,” she explained.
The right-leaning EU parliament member says it’s time for the people to hold countries accountable for their actions.
“What is Democracy all about?” Anderson questioned. “Democracy is all about the people telling the government what to do, not the other way around.”
Throughout the Covid-19 pandemic, Americans were forced to shutter businesses, close schools, and blindly agree to take newly released vaccinations. And if anyone dared speak against the latest narrative regarding vaccines or the virus? They could expect to be ridiculed, questioned, and ostracized by friends, family, co-workers, and even leaders in government.
“The whole narrative about ostracizing people was frustrating…the whole narrative of ‘my choice my body’ was gone. People were ridiculed and scapegoated,” the German politician reflected.
In 2021, President Joe Biden insulted Americans who had yet to receive “the jab” conveniently forgetting the fact he had cast doubt on the vaccines while Donald Trump was in the White House.
“If you’re not vaccinated, you’re not nearly as smart as I thought you were,” Biden said.
President Biden was an outspoken critic of former President Trump’s Operation Warp Speed program which is largely credited for helping create and distribute Covid-19 vaccines.
“The way [then-President Donald Trump] talks about the vaccine is not particularly rational,”
Biden said per the Western Journal. “He’s talking about it being ready, he’s going to talk about moving it quicker than the scientists think it should be moved. … People don’t believe that he’s telling the truth, therefore they’re not at all certain they’re going to take the vaccine.”
“And one more thing,” he said. “If and when the vaccine comes, it’s not likely to go through all the tests that needs to be and the trials that are needed to be done.”
However, while Covid-19 was able to highlight some government corruption Anderson says this dangerous assault on democracy has been happening for decades.
“We’ve seen a full-blown gaslighting of the people.” Anderson said. “Now, fundamental rights are being discussed as though they are privileges that the government grants or withholds depending on the citizen’s behavior.”
But all hope is not lost. The German politician was optimistic that more people have “woken up” over the past three years and are ready to push back.
“The so-called pandemic highlighted the left’s pressure campaign to redefine certain concepts,” Anderson reckoned. “It highlighted their ridiculousness and their willingness and determination to push back against people, disenfranchise them, and take away their rights.”
Anderson noted that her home country came dangerously close to repeating history by enacting legislation that would have forced unvaccinated citizens to pay for their own medical treatments or even be turned away for treatment altogether.
Germany’s public healthcare system ensures free healthcare for all.
“My country has been there historically,” Anderson warned. “This is exactly the stuff totalitarianism is made of. I had hoped that the Germans had learned their lesson, but I have to say they have not learned a damn thing.”
However, despite what some could call insurmountable odds Christine Anderson said she’s ready to take a stand against anti-democratic efforts whenever she sees it and refuses to let history repeat itself.
“I will always say what I believe to be true. When I see parallels between another totalitarian regime I will be there and I will point it out.”
Members of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee investigating the federal government’s response to the January 6, 2021 incidents at the U.S. Capitol now reveal that a pair of pipe bombs planted at the Capitol Hill offices of the Republican and Democrat parties may have been a diversion to distract law enforcement from other events.
They also reveal that while the bombs contained live explosives, it does not appear the timers were operable, and the FBI may not even have interviewed the witnesses who discovered them.
In response, Chairmen Thomas Massie (R-KY), Andy Biggs (R-AZ), Jim Jordan (R-OH), and Barry Loudermilk (R-GA) sent a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray “revealing new information surrounding the FBI’s investigation into pipe bombs placed near the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Republican National Committee (RNC) on January 5, 2021,” the Judiciary Committee reports.
“On June 7, 2023, the Committee on the Judiciary conducted a transcribed interview of Steven D’Antuono, the former Assistant Director in Charge of the FBI Washington Field Office (WFO),” the Committee announced.
“In that role, Mr. D’Antuono oversaw the WFO’s investigations into the events at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, including the placement of pipe bombs near the headquarters of the DNC and RNC on January 5, 2021. Mr. D’Antuono’s testimony provided new information about the FBI’s investigation into the pipe bombs and reinforces our concerns about the FBI’s handling of this matter,” the Committee revealed.
In his transcribed interview, Steven D’Antuono “suggested that the FBI could not even determine whether the placement of the pipe bombs was a ‘diversionary’ tactic for the events of January 6,” the Committee also revealed.
D’Antuono testified:
MASSIE: Are you familiar with the diversion thesis, that these were set up to be a diversion?
D’ANTUONO: Yeah, I’ve heard people say that, but if you watch – I’ve done a lot of media reports. I was trying to get the information out there, tips and stuff like that, right. I will not speculate. I’m not going to speculate on that. I think that’s speculation, at best, when people say that it’s a diversionary tactic. We’ll never know until we find the person that actually did – or persons that actually did it. So I can’t speculate on that. Could it have been? Yes, that’s one theory. Obviously, it’s one theory. But is it the only theory? I don’t – I really don’t know.
MASSIE: It looks like the head Capitol Police [sic] believes it was a diversion.
D’ANTUONO: So Steve Sund, chief of police, yes. I believe he wrote that in his book. Again, it’s pure speculation. There’s no intelligence – look, I ran the investigation for 2 years until I stepped out. We don’t know. We don’t even know the gender at this point as to – we could speculate, and there’s a lot of people that are speculating as to the gender.
MASSIE: How confident are you that the individual depicted in the surveillance footage on January 5th set both of those pipe bombs in place?
D’ANTUONO: So the video that we saw, I feel confident that by the video that we have, that that person planted those.
D’Antuono also testified on the “viability of the pipe bombs, which, according to reporting, were deemed to be ‘inoperable,’” the Committee reports.
“D’Antuono referenced a report from the FBI laboratory in Quantico, Virginia, that the pipe bombs were viable, and ‘they could explode, and they could cause harm or death,’” the Committee notes, adding. “D’Antuono also acknowledged that the timer used on the pipe bomb could not have detonated the pipe bomb given the time already elapsed between placement and discovery.”
He testified:
MASSIE: Well, let me ask you this: Do you think it was technically possible for a kitchen timer . . . that has [a] 1-hour duration . . . to detonate a bomb 17 hours later?
D’ANTUONO: No, I don’t. And I saw the same kitchen timer as you. I agree. I don’t know when they were supposed to go off. Maybe they weren’t supposed to go off. We can’t—we don’t know. We honestly don’t know, and that’s some of the pain . . . .
D’Antuono’s testimony “provided additional details about the FBI’s use of geofencing technology to identify the pipe bomb suspect,” the Committee revealed.
He testified:
D’ANTUONO: So the – there’s a lot of phone data that came in. Yes, I’ve seen the same video. I’ve watched the same video. We put out the same video. It looks like a phone. Was it a real phone, a not a real phone, was it a ruse? Was it a – you know, I picked up my phone several times at meetings going, oh, yeah, I got to take this call, and walk out, right. The phone’s not on, right. So was the person just sitting there trying to pretend like they’re on a bench taking a phone call? We don’t know until we find the person, right, and ask them those questions.
We did a complete geofence. We have complete data. Not complete, because there’s some data that was corrupted by one of the providers, not purposely by them, right. It just – unusual circumstance that we have corrupt data from one of the providers. I’m not sure – I can’t remember right now which one. But for that day, which is awful because we don’t have that information to search. So could it have been that provider? Yeah, with our luck, you know, with this investigation it probably was, right. So maybe if we did have that – that data wasn’t corrupted – and it wasn’t purposely corrupted. I don’t want any conspiracy theories, right. To my knowledge, it wasn’t corrupted, you know, but that could have been good information that we don’t have, right. So that is painful for us to not to have that. So we looked at everything.
D’Antuono also testified that he did not definitively know if the FBI had interviewed the individual who discovered the pipe bomb at the DNC.
He testified:
MASSIE: So just to . . . put a fine point on it, you do not know whether they interviewed the person that discovered . . . the [bomb] at the DNC?
D’ANTUONO: I don’t know.
The Committee notes “D’Antuono conceded that it would be ‘investigation 101’ to interview the individuals who discovered the bombs, yet he was unable to confirm whether the FBI had taken this basic investigative step.”
He explained:
MASSIE: So – but the person who found – you either haven’t identified the person who found the second pipe bomb, or did you?
D’ANTUONO: I – honestly, sir, I don’t know the granularity of everything my agents and analysts did in that matter. It’s just – it’s a whole host of stuff that’s going on. As the [Assistant Director in Charge], as like any senior leader, I’m getting briefed on things, and that part never came up, so –
“D’Antuono’s testimony raises concerns about the FBI’s handling of the pipe bomb investigation, more than 890 days following the placement of the pipe bombs. To date, the FBI has failed to respond to the Committee’s requests for a briefing regarding the investigation,” the Committee concludes.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
