Random

    Opinion

    Home Opinion Page 39

    Texas GOP Governor Declares Border Invasion, Again – What Next?

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    0

    ANALYSIS – The Biden border crisis just gets worse every day, with no help at all from the White House. 

    And now that a federal court has invalidated Trump’s Title 42 C*VID regulation forcing would-be asylum seekers to remain in Mexico, expect a massive new illegal migrant surge.

    Much of that surge and chaos is seen along the border with Texas which takes the brunt of the migrant onslaught.

    In response, Republican Texas Gov. Greg Abbott announced that he is invoking the U.S. Constitution’s invasion clause and taking “unprecedented measures” to repel a “border invasion.”

    https://twitter.com/josephanunn/status/1592639277590249474

    Abbott also sent out a press release and a letter to county officials along the border.

    Abbott’s declaration comes one week after he won a third four-year term as governor. Former Trump administration officials had been urging the governors of Arizona and Texas to declare an “invasion” to justify more aggressive measures to stem the illegal migrant tide.

    Infuriating his partisan critics and open border advocates, the Governor can expect severe legal pushback.

    The question is – can he win?

    As the American Bar Association Journal notes:

    The invasion clause is in Article 1, Section 10 of the Constitution.

    It provides: “No state shall, without the consent of Congress, lay any duty of tonnage, keep troops or ships of war in time of peace, enter into any agreement or compact with another state or with a foreign power or engage in war, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent danger as will not admit of delay.”

    Abbott said he will deploy the National Guard to “repel and turn back” immigrants trying to enter the country illegally. He will also deploy the Texas Department of Public Safety to arrest and return to the border immigrants who came into the country illegally.

    Abbott also plans to build a border wall in multiple counties, deploy gun boats, enter into a compact with other states to secure the border, and “enter into agreements with foreign powers to enhance border security.”

    Abbott first authorized the National Guard and Texas police to act in July, directing them to return immigrants to ports of entry. He also referenced the invasion clause at the time.

    However, Abbott has yet to issue a formal invasion declaration or official order. 

    His office has not published such a declaration through an official news release or on the governor’s website, which means he has not yet gone much beyond his actions and declarations in July. 

    National security expert and Navy JAG Jonathan Hullihan told The Center Square that if Abbott had invoked his constitutional authority on Tuesday, “he would have done so in an official document, not from a personal Twitter account.” 

    Hence “No document, no order.” 

    And critics question its legality. The ABA notes:

    Nunn said Abbott’s actions were actually “a thinly veiled effort to take the reins on U.S. immigration policy.” But that would also be unconstitutional under U.S. Supreme Court precedent holding that immigration policy is “unquestionably” and “exclusively” a federal power, Nunn said.

    “For all these reasons, the Biden administration would likely succeed in court if it sued to stop Abbott from carrying out his plans,” Nunn concluded.

    But others see this as a well-played political move putting Team Biden in a position it can’t win.

    “We’re literally talking about state officials doing the same exact thing that federal officials do with Title 42,” said Ken Cuccinelli, a senior fellow at the conservative nonprofit organization Center for Renewing America.

    And as the Washington Examiner reports:

    “He’s [Abbott] run Operation Lone Star and kept your National Guard up and running for a show. He knows it doesn’t do anything,” said Cuccinelli, adding that the state could win a battle in federal court. 

    “If you’re the federal government and you sue Texas over it … they have to prove there is not an invasion, and they have the burden of proof because they’re the plaintiff in the case. Good luck proving that today with the state of the border. I don’t think it could be done.”

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

    Biden’s Classified Materials Scandal Part of ‘Dark Money’ Nightmare – Will Dems Finally Turn on Him?

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    10
    President Joe Biden delivers remarks in National Statuary Hall on the one-year anniversary of the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, Thursday, January 6, 2022, in Washington, D.C. (Official White House Photo by Cameron Smith)

    ANALYSIS – The separate disclosures of highly classified materials found in three different locations tied to Joe Biden, and his delay in making public the first discovery in November seem to be souring even the most ardent Bidenistas.

    Per the New York Post, Biden’s loyal lap dog, Attorney General Garland, “solidifying his reputation as a bitter partisan hack, kept secret the first Biden document finding of Nov. 2 until after the midterm elections and seemed to be hiding each new finding until it was forced into the open.” 

    Biden’s prior harsh words about Trump “how could anyone be that irresponsible?” with classified documents found at Mar-a-Lago in August are now coming back to haunt him.

    And the president’s responses to questions about the documents, like dismissing the risk to national security, because, you know, they were in a locked garage next to his prized Corvette, have only made things worse.

    And so has his press secretary, Karine Jean-Pierre, whose avoidance, refusal to answer, dissembling, and nonsensical doublespeak, has become a serious sore spot among White House correspondents, not to mention the public at large.

    The New York Post reports:

    When reports emerged last Monday that multiple classified documents were found in an office Biden used after leaving the White House as vice president, the propaganda media circled the wagons around him by insisting he’s no Donald Trump. They had a point — up to a point. 

    But when reports two days later said a second batch of supposedly secret papers was found in Biden’s Delaware garage, the wall of media protection showed some cracks as the differences between the presidents’ cases narrowed. And when an additional classified page was found in Biden’s Delaware library, and a special prosecutor was appointed Thursday to investigate him, the defenders made a hasty retreat. 

    What makes this far more than just a mishandled classified documents scandal though, is the two locations where the materials were found. 

    Both connect to far bigger scandals — Chinese influence on the Biden family, corruption, pay-to-play schemes, and Hunter Biden.

    One – The Penn Biden Center – (well a closet in an office at this Center’s office space). This is the essentially made-up entity created to pay Biden $900,000 for doing almost nothing after leaving the White House as VP in 2017.

    But beyond the sleaziness of that deal, the University of Pennsylvania got $54.6 million in donations from Communist China from 2014 through June 2019, including $23.1 million in anonymous gifts starting in 2016.

    The Post reported: “The Penn Biden Center is a dark-money, revolving-door nightmare where foreign competitors like China donated millions of dollars to the university so that they could have access to future high-ranking officials,” said Tom Anderson, director of the Government Integrity Project at the Virginia-based National Legal and Policy Center.

    Was some of that money siphoned off to pay Joe? Was this a result of payoffs tied to Hunter’s Chinese business deals? And, did China gain access to the documents found there, or others ones not found?

    Two – Biden’s beach house. Hunter lives in the Delaware house, raising concerns he might have seen the documents, which were not secured beyond being in a locked garage next to Joe’s Corvette, while others were apparently found in the house itself.

    Did Hunter have access to these highly classified documents? Did he disclose the contents to his Chinese colleagues?

    We may soon have answers to these important questions. Especially since they have resurfaced now just the aggressive new GOP-led house begins its investigations into the Bidens.

    The timing could not be worse for Biden.

    As the POST writes: “Long before the document bombshells, GOP leaders vowed to follow the millions upon millions of dollars that Hunter Biden and Jim Biden, Joe’s brother, got abroad from selling access to Joe. Based on the contents of Hunter’s laptop, it’s certain that Joe benefited from foreign payments.” 

    As Rep. James Comer of Kentucky put it, “We’re not investigating Hunter Biden. We’re investigating Joe Biden.” 

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

    Amanda Head: Another Indictment- Why Are They So Scared Of Him?

    By
    Amanda Head
    -
    0

    Trump is facing a third indictment…

    Watch Amanda explain the situation below:

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

    FBI Sued for Documents on Cover-up of Hunter Biden Gun Sale

    By
    Donny Ferguson
    -
    4
    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)

    While law-abiding gun owners and sellers nationwide are targeted by the FBI and Justice Department over paperwork errors, at least one politically powerful gun owner may have gotten special treatment from the agency after his firearm was illegally left in a public trash can.

    The non-profit public interest law firm Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for FBI records about a gun owned by President Joe Biden’s 53-year-old son Hunter Biden, that reportedly was tossed in trash can behind a Delaware grocery store.

    “The FBI and Secret Service have both been implicated in a corrupt clean-up operation to protect Hunter Biden from the criminal consequences of his gun scandal,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

    Multiple media outlets reported in October 2020, weeks before the presidential election between Joe Biden and President Donald Trump, that in October 2018, Hunter Biden’s handgun was taken by his girlfriend Hallie Biden, also the widow of his brother Beau. 

    Hallie Biden, fearing what Hunter may do with the gun, threw it in a trash can across the street from a high school.  Realizing what she did, she later returned to retrieve the weapon, but found it missing.

    Delaware police began investigating, fearing the illegally-disposed weapon may have been taken by a high school student, or could be later used in a crime.

    But the case took a different turn when the Secret Service showed up.

    Rather than investigate the Bidens for illegally disposing of a weapon, or helping track it down, Secret Service agents showed up at the store where it was purchased and seized all paperwork connecting Hunter Biden to the gun, according to two people, one of whom has firsthand knowledge of the episode and the other was briefed by a Secret Service agent after the fact.

    Judicial Watch filed suit after FBI did not comply with a January 30, 2023, FOIA request for “all records, including investigative reports, telephone logs, witness statements, memoranda, and firearms purchase documentation, related to the reported purchase, possession, and disposal of a firearm owned by Hunter Biden discarded in a Delaware trash receptacle circa October 2018.”

    In a separate FOIA lawsuit, Judicial Watch received records from the United States Secret Service implicating FBI in the unusual action to help Hunter Biden.

    In response, Judicial Watch also asked for “all records of communications of FBI officials regarding the reported purchase, possession, and disposal of the firearm,” which may detail an effort to cover up any potential Biden family crime.

    Included in those Secret Service records is a response to a February 2021 email from Politico reporter Ben Schreckinger regarding the Secret Service’s involvement in the investigation of the Hunter Biden gun incident, the Communications Department asks for “more information or documentation.” 

    “Sure thing. Agents visited StarQuest Shooters & Survival Supply and asked to take possession of the paperwork Hunter had filled out to purchase a gun there. The FBI also had some involvement in the investigation,” Schreckinger wrote.

    Judicial Watch also uncovered a March 2021 email from New York Post reporter Lorena Mongelli, who reached out to the Secret Service Communications Office, asking for comment on text messages on Hunter Biden’s lost laptop.

    “It appears the text messages were sent from Hunter Biden in which he indicates that the Secret Service did in fact respond to the Oct. 23, 2018 [gun] incident. This information contradicts your previous statement relating to the incident and we would like to know whether the Secret Service would like to respond to these new findings,” Mongelli wrote.

    “We have received your inquiry, would you be able to provide copies of these alleged text messages for reference?,” replied a person from the Communications Office, whose name is redacted.

    Mongelli responds, noting the involvement of the FBI and Secret Service:

    The Daily Mail actually posted copies of the same text messages the NY Post is referencing. This is what one text message says:

    “She stole the gun out of my trunk lock box and threw it in a garbage can full to the top at Jansens [sic]. Then told me it was my problem to deal with,” Hunter wrote.

    “Then when the police the FBI the secret service came on the scene she said she took it from me because she was scared I would harm myself due to o my drug and alcohol problem and our volatile relationship and that she was afraid for the kids.”

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

    Biden’s Pick for Chairman of Joint Chiefs Used Racist Hiring Practices

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    5
    David B. Gleason from Chicago, IL, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

    ANALYSIS – In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision striking down Affirmative Action at top universities as unconstitutional, the same race-based policies used to achieve ‘diversity’ elsewhere are being scrutinized nationwide, including at the Pentagon. 

    And now we learn that Joe Biden’s pick to replace Army General Mark Milley as the next Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, himself had racist hiring practices. 

    That could make him ineligible to be the nation’s top military officer.

    Air Force General Charles Q. (CQ) Brown, a man of color, is accused of making “discriminatory comments and potential unlawful impact on military personnel,” according to the American Accountability Foundation (AFF).

    The AFF was set up in early 2021 to expose the leftist backgrounds of Biden’s top nominees. 

    Multiple sources have reported that Brown made statements while chief of staff for the Air Force and during his previous tour as Pacific Air Forces commander suggesting that he hired personnel and promoted them based on race, rather than merit, to force diversity in the Air Force.

    “Race-based hiring has no place in the military. Our men and women in uniform deserve to be led on missions by the most qualified and skilled officers and leaders our nation has, who will give them the best chance of success and getting home safely,” said the AFF in a statement.

    Considering the accusations against Brown, the AAF filed a complaint with the Air Force Inspector General and requested an official investigation into Brown’s allegedly discriminatory comments and practices.

    As the Daily Caller (DC) reported:

    While serving as the Air Force’s chief of staff and before that as Pacific Air Forces commander, Brown made statements suggesting he selects individuals for certain roles and promotions based on their race to build purposefully diverse organizations, multiple sources show. Brown could be violating the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause that prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, the American Accountability Foundation (AAF) argues, making him ineligible to become the next chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

    The DC added:

    If Brown has acted upon his “publicly stated beliefs on what should be official hiring policy of the U.S. Air Force [race-based hiring], it would present a significant likelihood of violating the civil and constitutional rights of military personnel” as well as Department of Defense (DOD) codes of conduct, AAF said.

    And records appear to show that Brown did exactly that.  Brown’s diversity policies appear to have prioritized bringing on non-white officers and recruits. The Air Force Times reported that 2022, Brown changed the Air Force’s demographic goals for officers to 67% of them being white, down from 80% in 2014. 

    But things have only gotten worse under Brown. According to a February 2023 Air Force newsletter, the Air Force also recently pledged to track officer promotions based on “race, ethnicity and gender.”

    So now the discrimination Brown has implemented isn’t only against white men, its against straight white men as well.

    I agree with AFF’s concerns, if these allegations are confirmed they should make ‘CQ Brown ineligible to serve as the next chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. And the United States Senate should not confirm him to that lofty role.

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

    Transgender Mass Murderer Targets Christian School – Kills Six

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    0
    Image via Pixabay images

    ANALYSIS – None dare call it hate. The recent horrific mass killing in Nashville is even more tragic when we understand who the killer was – and how the mass media has either ignored or downplayed her ‘trans’ identity.

    Or has made it a point of calling her a man rather than a mentally ill woman.

    It’s also tragic, no – outrageous – that none in the establishment media, or Joe Biden or anyone in his administration, has labeled the shooting a ‘hate crime’ even though it was.

    Local law enforcement has called it a targeted attack against a Christian school.

    The heavily armed 28-year-old mass murderer Audrey Hale who committed the massacre at Covenant School used two AR-style rifles and a pistol to kill three 9-year-old children and three adults.

    Reportedly a former student, she was was killed by police. 

    Her ‘manifesto,’ discovered at her home, has still not been made public.

    The killer was first reported correctly as a woman.

    Then the media fell all over itself apologizing for its mistake and quickly began stealth editing its initial reports and started calling her a ‘transgender male’ (which in most cases is actually a female claiming to be male).

    It is now mostly downplaying the trans issue and the fact that she was being treated for ’emotional’ issues.

    And unlike the rhetoric often employed by Democrats after a shooter targets any minority community – like an LGBTQ club or killings simply in a neighborhood with a high number of Asian Americans – they aren’t calling this a ‘hate crime.’

    The left is usually very quick to identify any crime it can committed by white conservatives, MAGA Republicans or Donald Trump supporters.

    Sometimes it is valid. Most of the time it is not.

    As my Georgetown roommate, and colleague, Quin Hillyer writes in the Washington Examiner:

    The message is clear: The media will bend over backward to kowtow to transgender ideology when it benefits the gender bender yet will also do backflips to hide a transgender status if somebody might draw negative inferences. Too bad the media honchos aren’t concerned about contributing to inaccurate characterizations of conservative people as dangerous and unhinged.

    First, let me be clear, most conservatives despise the ‘hate crime’ moniker because, well, a crime is a crime. Murder isn’t more of a murder because of the races or identities of the victims or perpetrators.

    But if you are going to use the term and have it impact how cases are investigated, tried and suspects are sentenced, then call this what it was – a hate crime against Christians by a lunatic transgender person.

    Federal law considers violence that causes bodily injury to a person to be a hate crime if it is motivated by race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity or disability.

    Of course, the fact that this killer was ‘trans’ shouldn’t become the sole focus, nor should it be used to unfairly label other trans persons.

    But it should be noted by the media and included in the entire process.

    And the targeting of Christians by a trans person should be a major focus.

    Senator Josh Hawley, R-Mo., who has opposed hate crime legislation in the past as too broad, quickly took action to ensure this anti-Christian hate crime perpetrated by a self-described transgender was treated as such.

    He called on federal authorities Tuesday to investigate Monday’s massacre as a hate crime against Christian believers.

    The New York Post reported:

    In a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray and Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, Hawley described Audrey Hale’s rampage through the Tennessee school that left three adults and three 9-year-old children dead as a “targeted” assault “against Christians” and called for “the full resources of the federal government” to be deployed to determine why the 28-year-old former student carried out the heinous crime. 

    “It is commonplace to call such horrors ‘senseless violence.’ But properly speaking, that is false,” Hawley writes. “Police report that the attack here was ‘targeted’ — targeted, that is, against Christians.”

    “I urge you to immediately open an investigation into this shooting as a federal hate crime. The full resources of the federal government must be brought to bear to determine how this crime occurred, and who may have influenced the deranged shooter to carry out these horrific crimes.

    Now, let’s see how Team Biden and the establishment media react.

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

    Amanda Head: DeSantis Is In! Tell Us Your Thoughts!

    By
    Amanda Head
    -
    28

    The showdown between former President Donald Trump and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has America hooked.

    Have you already made up your mind or are you waiting for a fight?

    Watch Amanda below:

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

    Amanda Head: Brutal Polls Numbers Are In For Biden!

    By
    Amanda Head
    -
    1
    Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    Democrats didn’t expect it to be this bad…

    Weeks after Joe Biden announced his re-election campaign and pollsters are already showing massive red flags.]

    Watch Amanda explain the situation below:

    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.

    Like BLM Riots in US, France’s Race Riots Do Major Damage

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    2
    A protester holds up a Black Lives Matter sign outside the Hennepin County Government Center.

    ANALYSIS – While the establishment media has tried to spin France’s recent wave of rioting as a response to unfair or racist French policing, like the Black Lives Matter (BLM) riots of 2020 in the United States, they really aren’t. 

    For both, that is only the pretext. But they are very similar in other ways.

    As I wrote before, both were about much more. In the case of BLM, it was part of a bigger far-left agenda. 

    In the case of France, it is an uprising of racial, cultural and religious resentment with Islamist overtones.

    Both also caused substantial physical damage ($1-2 billion) and injured many hundreds of police.

    The damages and injuries to police from the BLM riots across multiple cities in the U.S. were larger and spread over a few months. 

    In France, the first protests occurred in Nanterre, but then spread to other towns and cities, including Paris, Marseille, Lyon, Toulouse, Strasbourg and Lille.

    And in France, they only lasted about a week. France is also smaller in terms of population and its economy. So, overall, the impact was greater, and impossible to downplay as it was in the United States.

    The response to the rioting though has been very different in each country.

    The damage following a week of violence in France is expected to cost more than $1.1 billion, excluding damage to public buildings.

    French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire has promised support as thousands of insurance claims pour in. Insurers have received 5,900-plus claims worth some $305 million, according to the chair of the insurance industry lobby group ‘France Assureurs.’

    Rioters lit an estimated 23,000 fires and damaged 273 buildings belonging to the security forces, along with 168 schools and 105 mayor’s offices. In total, more than 1,100 buildings and 5,850 vehicles have been damaged or destroyed.

    More than 800 French law enforcement officers have been injured.

    According to Fortune, “The videos of the riots that circulated around the world hurt the image of France,” Geoffroy Roux de Bézieux, the outgoing head of the French employers’ lobby Medef, told Le Parisien newspaper.

    “It’s always difficult to say if the impact will be long lasting, but there will certainly be a drop in reservations this summer.”

    France’s Interior updated senators on the destruction carried out by primarily teenage mobs in ‘multi-ethnic’ areas of French cities. He said about 90 per cent of the 3,502 people arrested during the riots were French nationals.

    That doesn’t change the racial or demographic facts that most of the rioters were young Muslims of Arab and North African descent. They were born in France as part of the most recent immigration wave.

    The average age of the French rioters was 17.

    “What’s happening there is the consequence of a failure to integrate the country’s Muslim immigrant population,” Alan Mendoza, co-founder and executive director of the Henry Jackson Society, told Fox News Digital.

    President Macron sparked controversy on Wednesday by suggesting social media could be “cut off” if “things get out of control,” according to media reports.

    Macron singled out platforms like Snapchat, TikTok and encrypted messenger Telegram for their role in helping organize and spread images of the violence.

    Fox News reported:

    Macron has provided a mixed response to the crisis, initially describing the shooting as “inexplicable” and “unforgivable” but then decrying the protests and blaming everything from social media to video games for the increasing violence.

    Macron argued that social media platforms, including TikTok, Snapchat and others, helped fuel the riots, especially after the personal information of the officer who shot Nahel ended up circulating on the platforms. He said his government would work with social media sites to take down “the most sensitive content” and identify users who “call for disorder or exacerbate the violence.” Macron also denied there was systemic racism within the country’s law enforcement services.

    Meanwhile, as I wrote last August, in a few months in the United States, the BLM riots caused $2 billion in damages and injured 2,000 police officers nationwide. 19 people were killed during just 14 days of BLM rioting – none by police.

    The killing of police officers nationwide, though, surged 28% in 2020 during the BLM riots and protests.

    Unlike the muted judicial response to BLM rioters, France’s Justice Minister issued an order on Friday that demanded a “ strong, firm and systematic” judicial response.

    And unlike the United States, where President Donald Trump was attacked and vilified for trying to send federal officers to quell the violence – in France, Macron eventually deployed 45,000 officers and armored vehicles to control the riots.

    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