Opinion

Home Opinion Page 39

Trump Vows Largest Deportation of Illegal Aliens in American History

7

ANALYSIS – HALLELUJAH! – As Joe Biden’s radical open door border policies allow tens of thousands of illegal migrants to flood into the country weekly, former president Donald Trump is vowing to deport many, if not most of them.

And that is one of the best things I have heard from Trump recently. This is the only way to reverse the massive foreign illegal invasion Biden has created.

While other GOP presidential candidates have talked tough on the border, so far only Trump has promised massive deportations.

There should always be exceptions, but in my estimation, most who have come here illegally under Biden must go.

Trump’s comments come as the numbers of illegal aliens are again skyrocketing at the border. In the past five days alone, there have been over 45,000 migrant encounters both at the ports of entry and between them, including multiple days of over 8,000 illegal immigrant encounters.

There were reportedly around 230,000 migrant encounters in August, though the Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) have not provided official figures yet.

This is unprecedented.

Blasting Biden for the “nation-wrecking catastrophe on our southern border,” during a speech in Dubuque, Iowa Wednesday evening, Trump promised that, if elected, he would carry out “the largest domestic deportation operation in American history.”

“Following the Eisenhower Model, we will carry out the largest domestic deportation operation in American history,” Trump said, as reported by Fox News.

Trump also said he would “immediately” invoke the Alien Enemies Act — part of the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 – a federal law granting the president unilateral power to detain and deport foreign aliens in the United States who are over 14 years old.

As NBC News reported, the law says a president may order non-citizens “to be apprehended, restrained, secured, and removed as alien enemies” when he or she “makes public proclamation” than an “invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States by any foreign nation.”

And as I have pointed out repeatedly, this current crisis certainly counts as an “invasion or predatory incursion,” in many ways controlled and directed by Mexican drug cartels.

Trump said he would use the Act to target suspected gang members, drug dealers and cartel members. 

“I’ll…invoke immediately the Alien Enemies Act to remove all known or suspected gang members…the drug dealers, the cartel members from the United States, ending the scourge of illegal alien gang violence once and for all,” Trump vowed.

Trump added: “Under my leadership, we had the most secure border in U.S. history. Now, we have the worst border in the history of the world.” 

Of course, you can’t solve the problem solely by deporting two million or more illegal migrants, especially criminals and gang members, numerous other Biden policies must also be quickly reversed. 

And Trump addressed that too, in Iowa, saying that in his second term he would begin by “immediately” terminating “every Open Borders policy of the Biden Administration.”

At the top of his list, Trump promised to reinstate and “expand” the “travel ban” that he implemented during his first term. 

The ban, which Joe Biden ended on his first day in office, barred most individuals from seven countries with high terrorism indices — including five Muslim-majority countries — from entering the United States.

But he didn’t stop there, Trump added that he would expand his travel ban to “deny entry to all communists and Marxists to the United States.”

“Those who join our country must love our country—and we are going to keep foreign Christian-hating communists, Marxists, and socialists the hell out of America,” Trump declared.

That might be trickier to do, but I like how he is thinking.

The former president also said he plans to “shift massive portions of federal law enforcement to immigration enforcement,” including some of the FBI, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).

“I will make clear that we must use any and all resources needed to stop the invasion—including moving thousands of troops currently stationed overseas to our OWN southern border,” Trump said, emphasizing that “before we defend the borders of foreign countries, we must secure the border of our country.”

This is the most clear and comprehensive response proposed to date by anyone, to counter Biden’s illegal immigrant catastrophe.

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

The other Soros: Senator Reveals How this Liberal Swiss Billionaire Has Been Funneling Cash into US Elections

2
Image via Pixabay free images

A left-wing Swiss billionaire has been bankrolling the voting systems used in American elections, with an alleged bias toward liberals, a U.S. senator reveals.

United States Senator Bill Hagerty (R-TN), a member of the Senate Rules Committee, pressed Benjamin Hovland, Vice Chair of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC), on foreign influence in U.S. elections through what he called “a new form of Zuckerbucks: partisan, foreign-backed funding for local election administrators through the U.S. Alliance for Election Excellence.”

Hagerty calls it a “highly problematic scheme in which left-wing organizations provide substantial, foreign-funded resources for conducting American elections at the local level.”

Much of the funding comes from Hansjörg Wyss, a Swiss billionaire and multi-million dollar donor to left-wing causes through his “Hub Project.”

“This is an $80 million initiative, funded by a web of left-wing entities, to ‘help’ local election administrators conduct elections,” Hagerty explained. “It’s a new form of ‘Zuckerbucks,’ is what it is. This network of entities has received tens—if not hundreds—of millions of dollars from a foreign left-wing billionaire named Hansjörg Wyss. He’s not a U.S. Citizen, so he can’t contribute directly to our elections, but he’s found a way to be involved in our elections.”

“After being repeatedly pressed by Hagerty to acknowledge whether foreign donations used to conduct American elections are acceptable, Vice Chair Hovland conceded that this interference is inappropriate,” a statement from Hagerty’s office reveals.

“Absolutely not. Of course not,” Vice Chair Hovland answered. 

“I want to be clear with that because what this is is Zuckerbucks 2.0 coming from a foreign billionaire involving themselves in our elections. What I want to make certain is that this Commission—that no Election Assistance Commission dollars are commingled in any way with these foreign funds,” said Hagerty.

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

Amanda Head: Celebrity Unwittingly Admits Hollywood Wokeism Is Racist

0

It was only a matter of time until things would come full circle… even in Hollywood.

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

After Brutal Poll, Top Obama Advisor Suggests Biden Drop Out of Race

4
Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

ANALYSIS Are Democrats wetting their beds about Joe Biden? As I wrote about earlier, even the New York Times (NYT) is admitting Biden is losing in the polls to Donald Trump in five key electoral states. 

And David Axelrod, chief strategist for Barack Obama’s presidential campaigns, and a senior advisor to the former president Obama, is sending a message to the elderly Biden – “this is your last chance – get out now.”

This is one of Obama’s top advisors, so it seems like a veiled message from the ex-president himself to Biden that it’s time to quit. We will likely hear this chorus to grow among Democrat movers and shakers.

As reported by The Hill:

When questioned about his comments Monday, Axelrod told CNN that it’s a good time for Biden to check if he should keep up his campaign. Sunday marked one year before the election.

“As I’ve said for like a couple years now, the issue’s not — for him, is not political, it’s actuarial. You can see that in this poll and there’s just a lot of concern about the age issue, and that is something I think he needs to ponder. Just do a check and say, ‘Is this the right thing to do?’” Axelrod said.

“Is this the best path? I suspect that he will say yes, but time is fleeting here, and this is probably the last moment for him to do that check, and it’s probably good if he does,” the Obama alum added.

By ‘actuarial,’ Axelrod was referring to Biden’s age, calling it is “his biggest liability” and something he cannot change.

“Among all the unpredictables there is one thing that is sure: the age arrow only points in one direction,” Axelrod wrote on X. Meaning, Biden is only going downhill from here.

The NYT poll found Biden being trounced by Trump in five out of six battleground states including Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, and Pennsylvania by margins of 3 to 10 points.

The poll also found that 71 percent of registered voters said they agree to some degree that Biden is “just too old to be an effective president.” 62 percent of participants said Biden did not have the “mental sharpness to be an effective president.”

The Hill added: “Axelrod told CNN that he’s not reacting to one poll with his comments but has had conversations with people and finds 2024 a unique year considering the threat of Trump — who is leading the GOP primary race — on the other side of the aisle.”

The Hill continued:

“Trump is a dangerous, unhinged demagogue whose brazen disdain for the rules, [norms], laws and institutions or democracy should be disqualifying,” Axelrod wrote in a separate post. “But the stakes of miscalculation here are too dramatic to ignore.”

I would add that maybe the growing GOP impeachment inquiry into the Biden family business – ‘influence peddling’ – and the tax fraud and gun indictments against Hunter Biden, are also worrying Democrats.

Echoing the growing talking points about Biden quitting while he still can, a separate Hill piece reported:

Arguing Biden is “justly proud of his accomplishments,” Axelrod said Biden’s poll numbers will “send tremors of doubt” through the Democratic Party.

“Not ‘bed-wetting,’” but legitimate concern, Axelrod wrote…

“Only @JoeBiden can make this decision,” he continued. “If he continues to run, he will be the nominee of the Democratic Party. What he needs to decide is whether that is wise; whether it’s in HIS best interest or the country’s?”

 I don’t know about you, but I sense there is a lot of Democrat bed-wetting about Biden going around right now.

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

Growing Number of Americans Support War on Woke

5
Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Phillips writes:

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

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

But that too is less than meets the eye.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Phillips notes that:

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

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

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

Amanda Head: Even Hollywood Hates Meghan Markle Now

0
WELLINGTON, NEW ZEALAND - October 28: THE DUKE AND DUCHESS OF SUSSEX'S VISIT TO NEW ZEALAND: Engagement 6. Reception hosted by the Governor-General, Government House. October 28, 2018 in Wellington, New Zealand. (Photo by Mark Tantrum/ http://marktantrum.com)

Even woke Hollywood can’t stand Meghan Markle…

The former princess’ podcast finally got the axe…

Watch Amanda explain the situation below:

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

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

6
President Joe Biden hugs his family during the 59th Presidential Inauguration ceremony in Washington, Jan. 20, 2021. President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris took the oath of office on the West Front of the U.S. Capitol. (DOD Photo by Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Carlos M. Vazquez II)

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

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

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

That claim has since been proven to be a lie.


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Pollsters Missed the Target – Overreacted to Favoring Dems by Favoring GOP in Midterms

0
Donald Trump via Gage Skidmore Flickr

ANALYSIS – ‘Red ripple.’ For at least the last several elections, pollsters have consistently oversampled Democrats and undercounted Republicans, wrongly skewing the polls in the Dems’ favor.

This is something I have written about before, and the pollster errors include the ‘shy Trump supporter’ effect where conservatives simply shun pollsters or avoid giving their true views out of fear of retribution or being ‘canceled.’

Frank Luntz, a political strategist said to The Hill: “We knew from 2016, 2018 and even 2020 that Trump voters tended not to respond to pollsters because they thought that the results would be used against them.” 

This time around the pollsters seem to have screwed up in the opposite direction, overcompensating by overweighting Republican supporters and predicting a ‘Red Wave’ in the midterm elections that never materialized.

I must admit, I too assumed that the pollsters would continue to err in favor of Dems and hence believed the polling was still undercounting Republicans.

But as they say – you should never assume because then you make an ‘ass out of u and me.’

And as Luntz added, “past errors caused pollsters to over-index Republicans.”

The Daily Caller News Foundation just did a solid analysis on this latest pollster screw-up.

As the Daily Caller reports:

Weighting Republican respondents more heavily than Democratic respondents in polls led to an overestimation of GOP support, which created the mirage of a “red wave” this midterm season, polling experts told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

In the House of Representatives, FiveThirtyEight, based on an aggregation of major polls, predicted a 228-seat GOP majority as the most likely outcome, while RealClearPolitics had projected at least 227 seats, with additions from 34 tossup races. In the Senate, FiveThirtyEight forecast 51 seats for the GOP, with 52 and 53 seats being as likely, while RealClearPolitics forecast 53 seats for Senate Republicans.

The results were significantly different from these projections. Though some races are yet to be called, Democrats retained control of the Senate, having won 50 seats as of writing, while Republicans, though projected to win the House, will have a narrow majority close to the 218 seats necessary for one.

The Daily Caller continues:

In the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections, former President Donald Trump significantly overperformed polling in several states that pegged him to lose, with his unexpected 2016 wins in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio and North Carolina giving him an Electoral College majority to win. Though Trump lost the 2020 election, he still won states like Florida and Ohio and came close to winning races in Georgia, Arizona and Pennsylvania, which polling firms had estimated would be easily won by Joe Biden.

In all, in 2020, polls underestimated the presidential popular vote, swing-state vote, Democratic House majority and the Democratic Senate majority. The American Academy of Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) called it the “worst performance for polls since 1980.”

And this appears to have caused the severe pollster overcompensation we saw leading up to the midterms.

In artillery, you often fire beyond (long) and before (short of) a target to close in on it and ‘fire for effect.’ This is called ‘bracketing.’

The idea is that on the third salvo you should hit the target close to spot on.

Let’s see if these varied pollster results that undercounted GOP voters and then overcounted them were the ‘bracketing’ needed prior to their getting the 2024 polls right.

I’m not optimistic. GAND

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

Should the Government Regulate Artificial Intelligence (AI)? Less is Best

6
Image via Pixabay free images.

ANALYSIS – Artificial Intelligence (AI) is basically self-learning software (algorithms) that grows smarter over time using the entire world’s ever-growing library of data as its teacher. It can learn to do myriad complex tasks in a fraction of the time humans could.

It will revolutionize and upend entire economies, and dominate future warfare. It is also developing at an unprecedented rate. 

Many are concerned AI will take away entire career fields and tens of millions of American jobs. AI advancements could eliminate up to 300 million jobs globally, according to Goldman Sachs.

Fox News reported: “Up to 30% of hours currently worked across the U.S. economy could become automated by 2030, creating the possibility of around 12 million occupational transitions in the coming years, according to a McKinsey Global Institute study.”

Others worry that it will make a few corporations extremely rich and powerful. 

And then, many worry that Al may supersede human intelligence in just a few years and eventually make humans redundant.

Few would deny that whoever dominates AI may dominate the world. China certainly believes this and is forging ahead to become the world leader in AI.

The Pentagon is also looking closely at how it can use AI to more quickly make strategic or battlefield assessments and technologically leapfrog over our enemies.

But what about our government? Should it regulate AI?

Democrats tend to favor regulating everything. And they have shown the danger of doing so with social media. I recently wrote on how Joe Biden is already using executive power to weaponize Artificial Intelligence to be woke.

I noted that: “The American Accountability Foundation (AAF), a government watchdog group, recently warned that Team Biden is actively using the federal government’s vast power to regulate AI to promote a “woke” ideology in the basic architecture of this revolutionary, powerful, and dangerous new technology.”

“That ‘woke’ ideology promotes affirmative action under the guise of ‘anti-racism,’ and transgenderism as gender ‘equity.’”

And that is a huge concern.

Republicans tend to be more skeptical of regulation in general, especially in a dynamic, fast-moving technology that few lawmakers understand.

“Let a bunch of guys up here that are wearing JCPenney leisure suits that still have 8-track tape players in their ’72 Vegas start talking about technology, then you got some problems,” Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., told Fox News when asked about regulation keeping pace with the AI sector.

“The problem with AI is that it’s advancing so fast,” Republican Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina said. “It’s very difficult to regulate because you don’t know what the next thing is going to be.”

Republicans, like Burchett and Mace, also worry government regulation will stifle AI innovation and put the U.S. at a strategic disadvantage, especially vis a vis China.

“I don’t know that we need regulation,” Burchett said. “You want to stifle growth; you start putting laws on it.”

“If you overregulate, like the government often does, you stifle innovation,” Mace told Fox News. “And if we just stop AI, nothing is stopping China. We want to make sure that we are No. 1 in AI technology in the world and that it stays that way.”

But we may be losing that race. As Time reported:

“The country that is able to most rapidly and effectively integrate new technology into war-fighting wins,” Alexandr Wang, the CEO of Scale AI, told lawmakers on a House Armed Services subcommittee. China is spending three times more than the U.S. on developing AI tools, Wang noted. “The Chinese Communist Party deeply understands the potential for AI to disrupt warfare, and is investing heavily to capitalize,” he said. “AI is China’s Apollo project.”

But Republicans in Congress aren’t doing anything to take away Biden’s power to regulate AI himself. And time is of the essence.

As a former Democrat Senator, Kent Conrad, and ex-Republican Senator Saxby Chambliss wrote recently in Fox News:

This comes at a pivotal moment. We are on the precipice of a new tech revolution—one in which a collection of next-generation capabilities—such as AI, quantum computing, and biotechnology—promise to fundamentally upend every facet of society.

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

Alec Baldwin Charged with Involuntary Manslaughter over ‘Rust’ Movie Set Shooting

2

ANALYSIS – From the day cinematographer Halyna Hutchins was shot and killed on the set of the movie Rust, on Oct. 21, 2021, there has been a flurry of speculation over whether anyone would be criminally charged.

Hutchins was killed when a live round was fired from a real ‘prop’ gun being held by liberal actor Alec Baldwin.

Well, now the speculation is over, and Baldwin will be charged.

He has always denied responsibility, saying the replica old west revolver should have had dummy bullets and that he never pulled the trigger.

On the first point, Baldwin is correct; on the second, he is less convincing.

The set armorer is responsible for ensuring gun safety. And there was no reason for live rounds to be on a movie set. Period.

Much less mixed in with dummy rounds.

The armorer certainly is responsible if not culpable. And a big question is why live rounds were on the set and mixed in with dummy rounds and who put them there.

But experts have shown that Baldwin’s claim of not firing the gun doesn’t wash.

It is physically impossible for this type of gun to fire without the trigger being pulled and/or the hammer dropped.

Beyond his immediate possible culpability as the man who ‘fired’ the gun, Baldwin was also a producer of the low-budget Western film.

After the shooting numerous current and former crew members from the film publicly claimed that safety was extremely lax, and formal complaints had been made and ignored about those safety concerns.

The shooting occurred while rehearsing a scene inside a wooden chapel on Bonanza Creek Ranch in New Mexico.

This is a popular western location seen in the likes of Jimmy Stewart’s 1955 “The Man from Laramie” and Paul Newman and Robert Redford’s 1969 “Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid.”

As the crew worked out positions for the scene, Baldwin, playing a grizzled 1880s Kansas outlaw, fired a live round from an Italian-made Pietta Long Colt revolver replica – the bullet passed through Hutchins’ chest and lodged in director Joel Souza’s shoulder.

Hutchins died in a flight to the hospital in Albuquerque, while Souza was later discharged from the hospital.

In April 2022, the producers, including Baldwin, were fined $136,793 by the New Mexico Occupational Health and Safety Bureau, which said: “management knew that firearm safety procedures were not being followed on set and demonstrated plain indifference to employee safety.”

A wrongful death lawsuit was then filed against Alec Baldwin and other key members of the production in Feb. 2022.

The lawsuit named Baldwin and others who “are responsible for the safety on the set” and called out “reckless behavior and cost-cutting” that led to the death of Hutchins, according to the family’s lawyer.

The lawsuit also claimed that Baldwin and other “Rust” crew and cast committed “major breaches” of safety on the set.

That lawsuit was later settled.

But Baldwin’s legal woes continue as he is now being hit with two counts of involuntary manslaughter over the shooting.

Hannah Gutierrez Reed, the film’s young and inexperienced armorer, will also be charged with two counts of involuntary manslaughter.

Meanwhile, assistant director Dave Halls who handed the gun to Baldwin prior to the shooting signed a plea agreement for a charge of the negligent use of a deadly weapon.

In return, he received a suspended sentence and six months of probation, according to the district attorney.

If Baldwin is convicted, he could be facing up to 18 months in prison.

“Involuntary manslaughter in New Mexico is a Class D felony punishable by up to 18 months in prison,” former Assistant U.S. Attorney Neama Rahmani explained to Fox News Digital. “If Baldwin is convicted, I can see him being sentenced at or near the max.”

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