Popular shoe brand Crocs is siding with the woke gender mob…
Watch Amanda fill you in on the latest controversy:
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
After Bud Light’s major misstep consumers are looking for ways to make sure their hard-earned dollars go toward companies and institutions that respect their values.
Watch Amanda explain the situation below:
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
Like it or not Donald Trump is still popular…
The 2024 Republican frontrunner recently attended a UFC fight and the night’s events were interesting, to say the least.
Watch Amanda explain the situation below:
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ALERT – In what appears to be an idiotic attempt to supposedly kill Joe Biden, a 19-year-old man repeatedly rammed a U-Haul truck into the barriers around the White House at Lafayette Park on Monday night.
To be clear these barriers (or bollards) are designed to stop large vehicles and are a substantial distance from the White House perimeter fence.
There was no mention of explosives or other dangerous materials aboard the truck. Had there been this would be an entirely different story.
Still, the incident prompted the evacuation at The Hay-Adams Hotel on the 800 block of 16th Street.
The driver, Sai Varshith Kandula of Chesterfield, Missouri has reportedly been arrested and charged with multiple crimes, including threatening to kill, kidnap, or inflict harm on the president, vice president or family member.
He was also charged with assault with a dangerous weapon and reckless operation of a motor vehicle.
A man who said he was walking home from his run on the mall videotaped a driver in a U-Haul truck repeatedly ram the barricade at Lafayette Park near the White House.
“I decided it was time to get the hell out of there” he says
See the video below.
According to a United States Park Police statement, the driver “intentionally crashed into the bollards on the outside of Lafayette Park.”
Ya, that looks about right.
The Secret Service spokesman also tweeted:
Shortly before 10:00 p.m. Monday, Secret Service Uniformed Division officers detained the driver of a box truck after the vehicle collided with security barriers on the north side of Lafayette Square on 16th Street. There were no injuries to any Secret Service or White House personnel and the cause and manner of the crash remain under investigation.
Seems to me that the cause and manner of the crash are pretty obvious – the guy kept trying to ram through the barricades.
In a follow-up tweet, the spokesman said: “Charges will be filed by the United States Park Police with investigative support from the #SecretService.”
In the photo below the truck can be seen more clearly after the driver was secured and removed. The bollards can also be more clearly seen.
Meanwhile, is that a swastika flag on the pavement at the police officer’s feet?
The location of the crash is noteworthy since it lies at the south end of 16th St where it is now known as Black Lives Matter (BLM) square. Fox 5 reported:
Had the barriers been breached, two fences providing additional layers of security would have been in-between the driver and the White House. Lafayette Square has long been one of the nation’s most prominent venues for demonstration near the Executive Mansion. The park was closed for nearly a year after federal authorities fenced off the area at the height of nationwide protests over policing following the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, but it reopened in May 2021.
What the news outlet doesn’t say is that during those violent BLM riots at Lafayette Park in 2020 numerous officers were injured, cars and property burned, and the thin blue line of police at the park between the rioters and White House fence were almost overrun.
During the height of the rioting on May 31st, President Trump was also briefly rushed to the underground bunker by the Secret Service.
These barriers are designed to stop vehicles, not mobs of angry rioters.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
Bad news for Biden.
A new poll provides some chilling details for President Biden’s reelection plan. Will he finally start to listen?
Watch Amanda explain the new development below:
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
The federal government could no longer use taxpayer-funded retirement accounts to push companies to adopt leftist political policies, under a new bill from U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz.
The move counters a recent strategy by leftist radicals to gain control over the voting shares of publicly-held corporations, then vote in radical leftist policies that push “woke” social goals and divert billions in cash to activist groups.
One of the biggest shareholders in many corporations are retirement funds held by and managed for federal employees by BlackRock, a far-left, multinational hedge fund.
Cruz has introduced the Stop TSP ESG Act, which “will prevent companies that manage investment funds held in federal employee retirement accounts from using those holdings to vote in corporate shareholder meetings to force leftist Environmental, Social, Governance (ESG) and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) policies onto private sector businesses.”
Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.) is co-sponsoring the bill in the Senate.
Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) previously introduced companion legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives.
“BlackRock is able to leverage its position as the fund manager to vote in shareholder meetings and to force publicly traded companies to adopt ESG and DEI policies, even if doing so adversely affects investor value. As such, BlackRock prioritizes its political agenda over the interests of employees and retirees who are seeking to maximize their return on investment,” a statement from Cruz’s office reads.
“I am proud to join Congressman Buck and sponsor this legislation in the Senate to hold investment fund managers accountable and ensure they do not misuse their position as a fiduciary to advance an agenda contrary to the interests of their investors,” said Cruz.
“As the managing entity of TSP, BlackRock is leveraging the financial weight of the federal retirement system to push their woke ESG and DEI ideology through other peoples’ investments. BlackRock’s manipulation and brazen politicization of federal retirement accounts is wrong and should not be tolerated,” said Cruz.
“For years, BlackRock has been leveraging taxpayer money to force unwilling businesses to accept ESG and DEI policies. Through its position as the manager of the federal Thrift Savings Plan, BlackRock has abused public capital to push a radical agenda and censor conservative media,” said Buck.
“Woke Wall Street has been using the federal Thrift Savings Plan to force a radical left-wing agenda on the country. That’s a violation of their fiduciary duty and the basic precepts of democracy. Policy should be made in Congress, not BlackRock’s C-Suite,” said Will Hild, Executive Director at Consumers’ Research.
“The Stop TSP ESG Act is an important step in stopping the radical ESG agenda by protecting TSP account holders. BlackRock CEO Larry Fink admits to ‘forcing behaviors.’ Shareholders may be unknowingly supporting companies that disparage their values as proxy voting decisions are made by these radicals. Thank you, Rep. Buck, for introducing this legislation,” said Penny Nance, CEO and President of Concerned Women for America Legislative Action Committee.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
Hollywood has finally gone full tilt…
Watch Amanda break down the latest woke controversy below:
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
Stating that judges must take all testimony into account before deciding to accept a plea deal, one congressional leader is calling on U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland to release testimony from two Internal Revenue Service whistleblowers alleging President Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden was given preferential treatment by the agency and is being protected from the true consequences of his crimes.
Biden has pleaded guilty to two misdemeanor tax charges, as well as federal firearms charges, as part of a deal with federal prosecutors. He awaits a July 26 plea hearing.
But U.S. House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith (R-MO) is now calling on U Garland and U.S. Attorney for the District of Delaware David Weiss to submit to court allegations from Gary Shapley, previously the supervisor of the investigation at the IRS, and a second anonymous whistleblower alleging that investigators were pressured to go easy on Biden, ignore some crimes.
“Over the course of a single week in June, the existence of a plea agreement in this matter became public, a plea hearing was scheduled, and the Committee submitted whistleblower testimony to the full House,” said Smith in a letter to Garland and Weiss.
“Given the abruptness of the plea agreement announcement shortly after it became public that whistleblowers made disclosures to Congress, the seriousness of the whistleblower allegations, and the fact that multiple congressional investigations into the matter are ongoing, we ask that you file this letter and the attached information in the docket…,” said Smith.
“Placing the attached materials into the record is critical because the testimony provided by the two IRS whistleblowers brings new and compelling facts to light, and because it is essential for the Judge in this matter to have relevant information before her when evaluating the plea agreement,” wrote Smith.
“In his letter, Smith also highlights precedent where judges have rejected plea agreements for a variety of reasons, including situations where the judge finds that such deals were inadequate or deficient given the crimes committed or the motivation of the accused, or the plea deal was not in the best interest of the country,” a statement from the Committee reads.
Smith points out that plea agreements can be thrown out if it can be shown the plea agreement was reached improperly.
“In one state court proceeding, a judge rejected a plea agreement because ‘[i]t is contrary to justice. Justice in this society cannot be seen as being able to buy oneself out of a felony conviction.’ The Judge also went on to say, ‘[m]any in our community steal much less and go to prison or to jail…They steal much less and they don’t get a deferred judgment because they don’t have any money,’” wrote Smith.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – Let Freedom ring! – In a major victory for free speech in America, and a major vindication for conservatives who have been warning of Democrats using the government to censor them on social media, a federal judge is blocking federal agencies from communicating with Big Tech firms to censor posts.
The Democrats using federal agencies and other official political bodies to coerce or direct social media firms is being called government “censorship ‘by proxy.”
This injunction is particularly heartening to me, since I was a victim of this censorship when LinkedIn permanently banned my account for ‘multiple violations of their terms of service and user agreement.
In other words, I wrote about Hunter Biden’s laptop, the likelihood that COVID-19 leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology biolab.
All since proven valid.
I also noted that there are only two sexes, based on science, and refused to use ‘preferred gender pronouns.’
All these topics were effectively banned by the major social media companies, and as has since been proven via Elon Musk’s ‘Twitter Files’ expose, and other investigations, much of this banning was done at the behest of the U.S. government, primarily for partisan political or ideological reasons.
In the preliminary injunction, appropriately made on July 4th, the judge, Terry A. Doughty, wrote (pdf) that:
Opposition to COVID-19 vaccines; opposition to COVID-19 masking and lockdowns; opposition to the lab-leak theory of COVID-19; opposition to the validity of the 2020 election; opposition to President Biden’s policies; statements that the Hunter Biden laptop story was true; and opposition to policies of the government officials in power. All were suppressed.
He added that government agencies, including the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency (CISA), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the U.S. Department of State, the Department of Justice (DOJ), and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) are prohibited from taking a range of actions related to communicating or dealing with social media companies.
The judge provided very limited exceptions, allowing government officials to contact social media companies to alert them of criminal activity or clear threats to national security.
He also allowed, reported the Epoch Times: “contacts notifying social media companies about posts intending to mislead voters about voting requirements or procedures as well as communicating with companies about suppressing posts that are not protected free speech.”
The decision comes as a response to Republican state attorneys general (AGs) who sued the Biden administration. According to the judge, the AGs “have produced evidence of a massive effort by Defendants, from the White House to federal agencies, to suppress speech based on its content.”
Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey hailed the ruling on Twitter.
“The Court has granted our motion to BLOCK top officials in the federal government from violating the First Amendment rights of millions of Americans.”
“What a way to celebrate Independence Day.”
In an accompanying memorandum Judge Doughty stated that the plaintiffs are “likely to succeed on the merits in establishing that the Government has used its power to silence the opposition.”
In an earlier ruling in March, according to The Epoch Times, Doughty wrote: “This suit arises out of the alleged coercion by the Biden Administration and various government agencies and officials of social-media companies, urging those companies ‘to censor viewpoints and speakers disfavored by the Left.’”
He added that the plaintiffs allege that “this censorship was encouraged—perhaps even mandated—by the Biden Administration and several key governmental departments.”
The judge’s current order notes the various nefarious means in which the Biden administration colluded with Big Tech to censor opposing or dissenting views.
These means include, per the injunction, “engaging in any communication of any kind with social-media companies urging, encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner for removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech.”
The Epoch Times reported:
The agencies are also barred from flagging content on posts on social media platforms and forwarding them to the companies with requests for action such as removing or otherwise suppressing their reach.
Encouraging or otherwise egging on social media companies to change their guidelines for the removal, suppression, or reduction of content that contains protected free speech by the government is also not allowed.
To prevent Team Biden and other Democrats from circumventing the order by outsourcing their dirty deeds, it specifically applies to agents, officers, employees, and contractors.
While this is just a preliminary injunction, expect more to come in the fight against Democrat censorship.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – You would think that a senior U.S. military officer would finally have figured out that they should stay out of the ‘woke wars’
Unfortunately, Lt. Gen. DeAnna Burt, deputy chief of space operations at the U.S. Space Force (USSF), appears to have not gotten the memo.
Even as the Pentagon cracks down on ridiculous Drag Queen shows, and the Congress pushes to eliminate woke policies like taxpayer-funded abortion travel, and ‘diversity’ programs that are more divisive than inclusive, Burt decided now was the time to rail against what she called “anti-LGBTQ+ laws” at the state level.
She made her speech at a Pentagon ‘Pride’ event last week.
Fox News reported that she “claimed that such laws affect her hiring and promotion decisions, sometimes leading her to choose a “less qualified” candidate because of a preferred candidate’s ‘personal circumstances.’”
Yes. She said that.
Fox said that Burt told those attending the event:
Transformational cultural change requires leadership from the top, and we do not have time to wait. Since January of this year, more than 400 anti-LGBTQ+ laws have been introduced at the state level. That number is rising and demonstrates a trend that could be dangerous for service members, their families, and the readiness of the force as a whole.
Fox News explained:
The “anti-LGBTQ+ laws” Burt mentioned appeared to be referencing the legislation passed by more than 20 states restricting or banning gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors, as well as numerous bills limiting the amount of time in which an abortion can be performed during a pregnancy.
Most of these GOP-led state laws are perfectly reasonable, and designed to protect unborn children, and their mothers, as well as protect kids being pushed into irreversible transgender medical procedures.
They are also totally outside her purview, and democratically established by state legislatures.
But to Burt, they are so dangerous she prefers to hire less qualified candidates due to their ‘personal circumstances,’ rather than subject them to these states’ laws.
Fox News quoted her as saying:
When I look at potential candidates, say, for squadron command, I strive to match the right person to the right job. I consider their job performance and relevant experience first. However, I also look at their personal circumstances, and their family is also an important factor.
If the good match for a job does not feel safe being themselves and performing at their highest potential at a given location, or if their family could be denied critical health care due to the laws in that state, I am compelled to consider a different candidate, and, perhaps, less qualified.
Which part of ‘don’t get into partisan politics or the culture wars’ doesn’t she understand. And hiring less qualified people for a job based on ‘personal circumstances’ sounds like discrimination to me.
Not to mention horrible leadership, dangerous to national security, and bad for America.
But it’s not just one senior leader at USSF. According to leaked emails, last month, two Navy officials derided critics of the service’s promotion of LGBTQ+ Pride as “bigots” and “a—holes.”
These two ‘Pride Pushers’ reportedly schemed on how to best post a “rainbow wingtip graphic” for LGBTQ+ Pride Month on the Navy social media accounts.
As I wrote about then, the Navy only had one Pride image up on social media for less than a day on June 1st, the start of ‘Pride Month,’ before removing it.
None of the other services posted Pride imagery this year, a stark difference from last year when ‘Pride Month’ began.
This is hopefully part of a broader Pentagon policy to pull out of the ‘woke wars’ and keep partisan, ideological, racial, and sexual politics out of our military.
I noted earlier: “Only the Coast Guard and the National Guard made posts for Pride Month, but neither service changed its profile pictures or header image. Hopefully, they will soon get the memo.”
Well, now I add – these navy officials and Lt. Gen. Burt should also get the memo, or even better, an invitation to a Congressional hearing to explain themselves.
It’s time to focus on real wars, not woke ones.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
