ANALYSIS – It seems that the Democrat establishment has given its media the green light to start reporting real news about the Bidens. Some will see it as them going after Joe and Hunter Biden, but most will see it as something long forgotten by these organizations – journalism.
Either way, as Hot Air asked: “Who let the dogs out?”
And more importantly, why now?
White House Press reporters not from Fox News, or other conservative outlets, are finally asking Joe Biden tough questions, including whether he was involved in his son’s shady business deals.
And CBS Evening News did an entire national broadcast piece interviewing the senior IRS whistleblower about how the agency held back in its investigation into Hunter Biden.
The segment was only three minutes long, but that’s a lifetime in broadcast news, especially when the topic has literally been banned from the establishment media since Biden launched his campaign in 2020.
In the CBS segment reporter Jim Axelrod interviewed IRS whistleblower Gary Shapley in a professional manner and allowed him time to fully answer his questions.
The segment included reporting “…the stunning claim he [Shapley] was blocked from pursuing leads that could have led to the president himself.”
IRS whistleblower Gary Shapley, a lead investigator in the Hunter Biden case, said he felt the president's son received preferential treatment, and claims he was blocked from pursuing leads that could have led to the president. The DOJ and Biden’s attorney deny special treatment pic.twitter.com/SuBeg1k8Ij
This follows another CBS News story on the two whistleblowers last Thursday that included transcripts of their interviews with GOP lawmakers.
That story noted that: “Two IRS whistleblowers allege sweeping misconduct, including interference in the Hunter Biden tax investigation, according to the GOP House Ways and Means Committee chairman and newly released transcripts of congressional interviews with the whistleblowers.”
This can only start building to a bigger deluge of actual reporting on the Biden scandals. The question is why now? David Catron explained his view of the Democrat intrigue in the Spectator:
Something changed last week inside the Beltway that suggests the people who run the Democratic Party now realize President Biden’s tenure in office is not sustainable beyond 2024. The “tell” was not, however, the latest revelation by IRS whistleblowers about his corrupt administration. It was instead the sudden awakening of the White House press corps. The same “reporters” who snored through more than two years of preposterous claims by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and her predecessor simultaneously woke up Friday. Correspondents from media outlets CNN, CBS, NBC, and even the New York Times aggressively questioned Jean-Pierre about the metastasizing Hunter Biden scandals.
This wasn’t spontaneous. The word has gone out that regime change is coming [emphasis added].
So, it seems Democrats want Biden out. And Kamala Harris too. And can you blame them?
I have long predicted that Biden would not finish the 2024 race. Too old. Too frail. Too demented. Too scandal plagued. And Harris is just plain dumb. And unelectable.
“They’re gonna really run Joe down, and it’s gonna get to a point where basically, Jill’s gonna come along and pull Joe and say, ‘You know, Joe and I have decided that we have fixed everything Trump messed up. We’ve done our job; it’s time to pass the mantle on to the successor.’”
Prather adds that Biden’s withdrawal from the 2024 race will allow him to avoid any criminal liability and believes he and Jill will sign a very big book deal, and as part of a bigger deal, will likely let Harris be president, briefly.
“She’ll get to be the first female president — just for a second. That’ll keep her from running her mouth too much later on, because they’ll throw her that bone,” Prather adds.
“She’ll go down in history as that.”
I must admit this scenario sounds plausible to me. The only remaining question is, who will be the real Democrat candidate for president in 2024?
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
Without a whisper, David Brock once again took his seat in that deep club chair, the one upholstered in battered oxblood leather and steeped in quiet menace. He reached for his tailor-crafted inner pocket, drawing from it a fresh Davidoff 702 Double R. The oily Ecuadorian leaf caught flame with practiced ease, releasing those same familiar notes of dark chocolate and café crema. Nearby, a Baccarat tumbler appeared in a silent ritual of service, filled just so with Pappy Van Winkle, as though it had always been there. This wasn’t just habit. It was stagecraft, and the man in the chair was directing a performance with constitutional consequences.
There was no need for preamble. Those in the room knew why they were there. Brock was about to reintroduce the legal profession to its own velvet-clad nightmare. His audience, a quiet circle of left-wing patrons and media barons, leaned in as he explained the next phase of his campaign, not against Donald Trump per se, but against anyone daring to offer him or his allies a legal defense. This wasn’t about winning court cases. This was about ensuring those cases were never filed at all.
The 65 Project, Brock explained, was not an electoral effort. It was not a messaging campaign. It was war. A war against the 6th Amendment, that slender but essential clause guaranteeing every American the right to legal counsel. Its aim? To deprive Republicans, particularly those challenging elections or government orthodoxy, of any capable legal defense.
Screenshot via X [Credit: @amuse]
Run through Brock’s network of nonprofits and housed under Law Works, the 65 Project deployed seasoned political operatives to file bar complaints, ethics charges, and sanctions motions against Trump-affiliated attorneys. The power of the model lay in its asymmetry. A single complaint, even meritless, could cost an attorney tens of thousands of dollars and a year or more in disciplinary review. And even if dismissed, the stain was permanent.
In 2025, this campaign has not slowed. In February, the 65 Project filed a high-profile complaint against Edward Martin, then the interim US Attorney for the District of Columbia. His offense? Alleged conflicts of interest tied to representing January 6 defendants before his federal appointment. The complaint cited violations of Rule 4-1.7 of professional conduct, a detail blasted across the headlines of friendly media outlets. As of June, there is no word on whether the complaint succeeded, but that isn’t the point. The accusation is the punishment.
Incredibly, the 65 Project also targeted the sitting Attorney General of the United States, Pam Bondi. On June 5, 2025, a coalition including the 65 Project, Democracy Defenders Fund, Lawyers Defending American Democracy, and Lawyers for the Rule of Law filed a 23-page ethics complaint with the Florida Bar, accusing Bondi of “serious professional misconduct.” The complaint alleged that Bondi threatened DOJ lawyers with discipline or termination for failing to pursue President Trump’s political objectives, particularly via a February 5 “zealous advocacy” memo. It claimed her actions led to resignations and firings in violation of DOJ norms and Florida Bar rules. Yet, on June 6, the Florida Bar summarily rejected the complaint, citing a policy against investigating sitting officers appointed under the US Constitution. It was the third such complaint against Bondi, and the third rejection. Critics like DOJ Chief of Staff Chad Mizelle called the filings “vexatious” and politically motivated. That the 65 Project would go after a sitting Attorney General at all illustrates the sheer audacity, and absurdity, of their campaign. They have announced they will be filing more complaints against Bondi.
Even more outrageous, the same coalition named two additional Trump administration officials in their June 5 complaint: Emil Bove, Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General and Todd Blanche, Deputy Attorney General. The complaint accused them contributing to a culture of unethical conduct within the Justice Department by pressuring career lawyers to ignore professional responsibilities and instead pursue political objectives at the behest of President Trump. The goal was clear: not just to intimidate one leader, but to undermine the credibility of an entire legal team working within the bounds of the law.
This complaint, like so many others, underscores the project’s enduring mission: to ensure lawyers think twice before defending Trump or any of his associates. Public defenders and private litigators alike have been swept into the net. Whether you were in court for Giuliani, or simply filed an amicus brief on election integrity, the 65 Project likely has your name on a list.
This strategy, weaponizing legal ethics as a partisan bludgeon, would have made Boss Tweed grin from ear to ear. Backroom operators like Col. George Brinton McClellan Harvey would recognize it instantly. Harvey, managing editor of the Democratic Party’s press empire at the turn of the 20th century, orchestrated conventions from smoke-filled rooms in Chicago’s Blackstone Hotel, where policies were written not in law books, but on cocktail napkins between puffs of Havana cigars. Brock, in many ways, is his spiritual heir, using legal bureaucracy the way Harvey used ink and influence.
The Biden-appointed judiciary has not resisted. In Michigan, Democratic activists succeeded in convincing a federal judge to sanction every lawyer who filed election-related litigation for Trump in 2020. Among them: Lin Wood, Sidney Powell, and Stefanie Junttila. Each was ordered to pay legal fees to Democratic Party groups and attend re-education courses, under the euphemism of continuing legal education. The court referred them for possible disbarment, fulfilling Brock’s vision.
Michael Teter, managing director of the 65 Project, has filed complaints against more than 100 attorneys across 26 states. The targets include high-profile figures like Jenna Ellis, John Eastman, and Cleta Mitchell. And while many of these complaints were dismissed by mid-2023, the damage to reputations and client relationships lingers.
The project’s tactics have drawn sharp rebuke. Congressman Lance Gooden, in April 2025, called the 65 Project a “political hit squad” and demanded a Justice Department investigation. Others on social media have accused the group of colluding with establishment Republicans to kneecap Trump’s legal allies. Yet Brock’s defenders frame the group as guardians of democracy, protecting the legal profession from ethical collapse.
Such framing is dishonest. When Alan Dershowitz defended Al Gore in 2000, no one suggested he should be disbarred for challenging election results. But now, lawyers challenging questionable election conduct on behalf of Republicans face professional ruin. This is not accountability. It is ideological warfare.
Critics may point out that the 65 Project has not secured many disbarments. That may be true, but they have achieved some high-profile penalties. Jenna Ellis was publicly censured by a Colorado judge in March 2023. Rudy Giuliani had his law license suspended in New York and is facing permanent disbarment proceedings in Washington, DC. John Eastman was disbarred in California following a March 27, 2024, decision by State Bar Court Judge Yvette Roland, who found him culpable of 10 out of 11 disciplinary charges related to his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. His license was placed on involuntary inactive status days later, rendering him ineligible to practice law in California. Eastman has appealed, but as of June 15, 2025, no reversal has been reported. He was also suspended from practicing law in Washington, DC, on May 3, 2024, pending resolution of the California case. Lin Wood surrendered his law license in Georgia under pressure from multiple complaints. These results are rare but not insignificant. Still, the goal was never just disbarment. It was deterrence. It was a public display of consequence, a digital scarlet letter. No need to win in court when you can win in LinkedIn’s HR department.
The project has inspired imitators including the Democracy Defenders Fund, Lawyers Defending American Democracy, and Lawyers for the Rule of Law. The Lincoln Project also targets law firms, encouraging junior associates to pressure partners against accepting GOP clients. Shutdown DC and the Un-American Bar maintain lists of “insurrectionist” lawyers. Others push the American Bar Association to adopt rules banning election challenges altogether, cloaking censorship in the rhetoric of professionalism.
Marc Elias, the left’s court general, has taken the mission even further, seeking to disqualify GOP candidates under the 14th Amendment, resurrecting post-Civil War measures to bar Trump allies from holding office. Lawsuits against Paul Gosar, Andy Biggs, and others reflect this broader ecosystem of lawfare. It is a constellation of coordinated attacks designed to render conservative legal advocacy untenable.
And what of the Constitution? The Sixth Amendment was never meant to be partisan. It exists not to protect the powerful, but the accused. In America, even pariahs have lawyers. Even the guilty deserve defense. The 65 Project’s perverse genius is to flip that premise, treating legal representation as complicity, and enforcing political loyalty through professional terror.
David Brock did not build this machinery alone. Melissa Moss, a Clinton veteran, helped architect the effort. She recruited Democratic grandees, Tom Daschle, ABA presidents, former state judges, to lend legitimacy. Their goal? To make conservative legal advocacy professionally radioactive.
And it may be working. Some lawyers are declining GOP clients outright. Others fear disciplinary complaints, X mobs, or worse. The chilling effect is real, and precisely what the architects intended. The War on the Sixth is a war on courage, a war on professional independence, a war on the idea that justice should be blind.
In the end, Brock’s smoke-filled rooms are not about cigars or cocktails. They are about control. They are about ensuring that when Republicans step into a courtroom, they do so alone.
Dr. Benjamin S. Carson, Sr., M.D., is Founder and Chairman of the American Cornerstone Institute, a new think tank / do tank whose mission is to promote the 4 founding principles which are cornerstones of our country: faith, liberty, community and life as well as pursue common sense solutions that challenge conventional groupthink. He most recently served as the 17th Secretary of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
For nearly 30 years, Secretary Carson served as Director of Pediatric Neurosurgery at the Johns Hopkins Children’s Center, a position he assumed when he was just 33 years old, becoming the youngest major division director in the hospital’s history. In 1987, he successfully performed the first separation of craniopagus twins conjoined at the back of the head. He also performed the first fully successful separation of type-2 vertical craniopagus twins in 1997 in South Africa.
Dr. Carson received dozens of honors and awards in recognition of his achievements including the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation’s highest civilian honor. He is also a recipient of the Spingarn Medal, the highest honor bestowed by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and has been awarded over 70 honorary doctorate degrees. Dr. Carson authored nine books, four of which he co-wrote with his wife Candy. The U.S. News Media Group and Harvard’s Center for Public Leadership named him among “America’s Best Leaders” in 2008.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – Tucker Carlson’s misguided attempt to use cherry-picked moments of the newly released video of Jan. 6 to argue that nothing bad happened at the Capitol that day, is horribly timed and very dumb.
As I wrote the day after I personally observed events at the Capitol that day, January 6 was neither a deadly coup, insurrection nor peaceful guided tours of the Capitol.
It was a mixture of some of those things, none of those things, and everything in between.
And Tucker would have been far more effective, and credible had he used the video to show that the Left’s Jan. 6 narrative was incomplete, distorted, and totally one-sided, rather than trying to say it was totally false.
Because the truth is that Jan 6 was like the story of the blind men and the elephant, each one grasping one part of the animal, like the leg, tail, or trunk, and describing the giant beast as something totally different.
On Jan. 6 what began as a massive peaceful rally of tens of thousands of pro-Trump protesters, soon degraded when smaller elements (a few hundred) of the much larger peaceful crowd broke off and did conduct a violent attack on parts of the Capitol.
Hundreds more just stupidly followed the initial ‘attack mob’ inside.
In the first group, some had military training, used stack formations, and were very organized and intent on forcefully breaching the building.
While none were found with, or used firearms, during the riot, there was violence with sticks, flagpoles, and pepper spray.
I called these violent rioters, thugs, and criminals.
They were similar to the violent BLM rioters who had violently attacked police at the White House in the summer of 2020 or besieged the Portland Federal Courthouse for months.
On Jan. 6 police officers were similarly attacked and beaten, and the Capitol was ultimately breached unlawfully.
Inside, one non-violent protester, Ashley Babbitt, an Air Force security forces veteran, was shot by a Capitol Police Officer. Likely, unjustly.
She was the only person killed during the riot.
All this occurred in the span of just a few hours.
But the Capitol complex is massive, and what was happening violently on one end was not being replicated at other parts of the Capitol.
As much of the Tucker video showed truthfully, in many places and entrances, Capitol Police had allowed protesters inside, in some cases escorted them around.
In other cases, the police simply stood by as the ‘tourist’ protesters milled around and took selfies or acted stupidly.
Still, ever since then, there has been a profound narrative battle pitting those fanatics on the right who said nothing at all happened and the fanatics on the left who claim Jan. 6 was worse than Pearl Harbor or 9/11, and an insurrection that risked the essence of American democracy.
Sadly, neither side is correct, but only the most extreme one-sided ‘insurrection’ narrative was put forward by the left and last Congress’ Democratic-run Jan. 6 committee, and repeated daily by the partisan, anti-Trump media.
The insurrection narrative was pushed by cherry-picked videos and photos of the same short-lived Capitol violence from different views and angles, repeated in a nearly constant loop for the most distorted and dramatic effect possible.
Capitol Police Chief Thomas Manger wrote in an internal message to officers that Carlson’s Monday night primetime program “conveniently cherry-picked from the calmer moments of our 41,000 hours of video” to incorrectly portray the violent assault as more akin to a peaceful protest. He added that Carlson’s “commentary fails to provide context about the chaos and violence that happened before or during these less tense moments.”
“It’s definitely stupid to keep talking about this … So what is the purpose of continuing to bring it up unless you’re trying to feed Democrat narratives even further?” Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas) said in an interview, noting the videos didn’t show “anything we don’t already know.”
“I don’t really have a problem with making it all public. But if your message is then to try and convince people that nothing bad happened, then it’s just gonna make us look silly.”
So how should we view the events of the January 6 riot accurately and fairly?
Probably the best description was provided by Rep. Kelly Armstrong (R-N.D.) when he said he has “a hard time with all of it.”
He added that Jan. 6 “was not a peaceful protest. It was not an insurrection. It was a riot that should have never happened. And a lot of people share the blame for that. The truth is always messier than any narrative.”
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – The fight against China’s growing global network of illegal police outposts has finally heated up here in the United States with the FBI raiding the large Chinese station in New York City (NYC).
This is the mission the FBI should be focused on, rather than raiding pro-life activists or colluding with Big Tech to censor Americans.
I’ve written about these extraterritorial Chinese police stations several times, highlighting the ones in NYC, as well as those in Canada and Europe.
Beijing says these outposts aren’t doing any police work, only helping Chinese citizens abroad, but Chinese state media reports that they in fact “collect intelligence” and solve crimes far outside their jurisdiction.
But they do far more than that.
They are accused of conducting illegal surveillance on legal U.S. residents and citizens of Chinese extraction and intimidating, threatening, and coercing them.
In some cases, they have reportedly even kidnapped people outside of China.
According to the New York Times (NYT), the FBI raided the suspected Chinese police outpost, hidden in New York City’s Chinatown last fall, seizing materials from one of the secretive operations for the first time.
The Chinatown outpost was on the third floor of a six-story office building on a busy street. It was raided by FBI counterintelligence agents working on a criminal investigation with the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York.
Of course, as the NYT reports, the Chinese Embassy in Washington downplayed the outposts, claiming they are staffed by volunteers who help Chinese nationals perform routine tasks like renewing their Chinese driver’s licenses.
Despite the official Chinese denials, the NYT reports, “Western officials see the outposts as part of Beijing’s larger drive to keep tabs on Chinese nationals abroad, including dissidents. The most notorious such effort is known as Operation Fox Hunt, in which Chinese officials hunt down fugitives abroad and pressure them to return home.”
In October, prosecutors in Brooklyn — the same office that searched the New York office — charged seven Chinese nationals with harassing a U.S. resident and his son, pressuring the man to return to China to face criminal charges.
As reported by the NYT, “It’s outrageous that China thinks it can come to our shores, conduct illegal operations and bend people here in the United States to their will,” FBI Director Christopher Wray said in 2020.
At least 102 such outposts have been documented in 53 countries in recent months by the human rights group Safeguard Defenders. Wray said in November that he’s “very concerned” about the outposts, which he called “police stations.”
“It’s a long-arm power to show their own citizens inside China that their government is so strong,” said Safeguard Defenders researcher Chen Yen-ting. “We have the power to reach globally, and even if you go out, you’re still under our control.”
These outposts are ostensibly set up by local Chinese municipalities or regions. At least four Chinese localities — Fuzhou, Qingtian, Nantong and Wenzhou — have reportedly set up dozens of foreign police outposts in Japan, Italy, France, Britain, Germany, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and other nations.
These don’t include the ones in Canada and the U.S.
Let’s hope the FBI keeps up the pressure on illegal Chinese police activity in the U.S., and the State Department gets involved in controlling any Chinese entities and personnel it has allowed to enter and operate on U.S. soil.
Communist Chinese influence and subversion in the U.S. is the greatest domestic threat we face, not Americans exercising their constitutionally protected right to free speech.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
A top congressional chairman is leaning on the Internal Revenue Service to revoke the tax-exempt status of several left-wing or Islamist organizations for actively supporting deadly Islamist terrorist activity.
The U.S. House Ways and Means announced in a statement that Committee Chairman Jason Smith (MO-08) is calling on the IRS to “revoke the tax-exempt status of multiple organizations previously referred by the Ways and Means Committee for failing to operate within their stated tax-exempt purpose.
“The letter coincide(ed) with the anniversary of the October 7th terrorist attack on Israel and targets organizations with links to designated foreign terrorist groups, as well as organizations linked to violence and unrest in the United States,” the Committee reports.
“Chairman Smith previously demanded then-IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel revoke the tax-exempt status of eight organizations with ties to Hamas and terror-linked organizations, as well as entities fueling antisemitic protests on U.S. college campuses and violence in the U.S.
In the letter to the IRS, Chairman Smith wrote: “We write to request that the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) prioritize examinations into the tax-exempt status of tax-exempt organizations previously referred to the IRS for revocation during the 118th Congress. In light of the anniversary of the October 2023 violent attack on Israel, along with recent acts of political violence and the continued disruptive activities of previously identified organizations that have been sowing chaos in the United States and have links to designated foreign terrorist groups, it is imperative that action is taken to ensure tax-exempt groups are operating within their tax-exempt purpose.”
Smith’s letter continues, “From the international funding sources and activities of tax-exempt entities in the U.S., and the role of certain organizations in fostering antisemitism on college campuses, the Committee has remained steadfast in ensuring that all tax-exempt organizations are abiding by their exempt status. In September 2024, the Committee on Ways and Means (“the Committee”) sent seven letters to the IRS requesting that the IRS investigate and revoke the tax-exempt status of the referenced organizations, while also highlighting the tax-exempt organizations’ ties to Foreign Terrorist Organizations, support of illegal activity in America, and failure to operate for stated exempt purposes. Some of the organizations, such as Americans for Justice in Palestine Educational Foundation, American Muslims for Palestine, and Islamic Relief USA, are suspected of having terrorist ties to groups like Hamas, using those ties to actively support and funnel resources in support of terrorism. Other groups like the Alliance for Global Justice, WESPAC Foundation, and Tides Foundation instead fiscally sponsor projects that disrupt college campuses, incite violence and intimidation, and illegal riot across the United States—prominent projects include Students for Justice in Palestine and Samidoun. Together, this evidence strongly supported referring the groups to the IRS for revocation of their tax-exempt status.”
The committee notes “organizations for which Chairman Smith is renewing referral for revocation of tax-exempt status include: Americans for Justice in Palestine Educational Foundation, American Muslims for Palestine, Islamic Relief USA, Alliance for Global Justice, WESPAC Foundation, Tides Foundation, Peoples Media Project (also known as The Palestine Chronicle), and The People’s Forum.”
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk.
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.
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.”
President Donald J. Trump is presented with a 10th Combat Aviation Brigade challenge coin following an air assault and gun rain demonstration at Fort Drum, New York, on August 13. The demonstration was part of President Trump's visit to the 10th Mountain Division (LI) to sign the National Defense Authorization Act of 2019, which increases the Army's authorized active-duty end strength by 4,000 enabling us to field critical capabilities in support of the National Defense Strategy. (U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Thomas Scaggs) 180813-A-TZ475-010
The non-profit public interest law firm Judicial Watch reports they filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Energy for “records about the retroactive termination of former President Donald Trump’s security clearance and/or access to classified information.”
Judicial Watch reports the lawsuit “cites Trump’s January 12, 2024, motion to compel discovery in his criminal prosecution in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, in which the former president asserts that DOE attempted to terminate his security clearance retroactively after his June 2023 indictment by Special Counsel Jack Smith.”
“It looks like the Department of Energy is trying to manufacture a criminal case,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “What are they hiding?”
Judicial Watch reports the lawsuit “points to the February 2024 response to Trump’s January 2024 motion in which Smith acknowledges the existence of a June 2023 memorandum prepared by an Energy Department official regarding the security clearance.”
“The Special Counsel’s office describes the memorandum’s contents and asserts that it had produced the record to Trump,” Judicial Watch reports. “Smith also acknowledges requesting and receiving additional ‘responsive’ records from DOE, including ‘approximately 30 pages of records and eight emails.’ Smith asserts that he was ‘now producing’ the 30 pages to Trump and withholding the eight emails.”
“Trump’s lawyers suggest in the January 2024 motion to compel discovery that Trump had a high-level security clearance as recently as 2023,” Judicial Watch notes.
“Lawyers for Trump say a government document from June 2023 still listed him with a “Q” clearance from the DOE. The document was dated a few weeks after prosecutors indicted Trump in the classified documents case,” Judicial Watch reports. “A ‘Q’ clearance refers to a type of security clearance handled by the Department of Energy, which holds classified information focused largely on nuclear secrets.”
Judicial Watch reports it “filed the lawsuit after the Energy Department failed to comply with a January 18, 2024, FOIA request for its records and communications concerning retroactively terminating Trump’s security clearance and/or access to classified information.”
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – Following Joe Biden’s new rule restricting feds from investigating or arresting journalists and the ongoing outcry against FBI agents using ‘storm-trooper’ SWAT-style raids against peaceful American pro-life activists, the Bureau goes and does it again.
Most recently, Joerg Arnu, owner of www.Dreamlandresort.com, a popular Area 51 website issued a statement after heavily armed federal agents reportedly raided his homes at gunpoint several weeks ago.
Dreamlandresort.com was founded in 1999 and has long hosted information about the restricted military base widely known as Area 51, but also called Homey Airport or Groom Lake.
The extremely well-guarded Area 51 is classified as a ‘Military Operating Area’ by the Pentagon, but for most in the military, it’s simply known as the Nevada Test and Training Range, part of Edwards Air Force Base.
“The base itself is fairly small, but the restricted area around it is over 90,000 acres — partly to prevent prying eyes and partly because they need to test classified aircraft,” Benjamin Radford, a writer on the subject, told Space.com earlier.
The raid of Arnu’s Nevada home, conducted jointly between the FBI and U.S. Air Force, was first reported by the Las Vegas Review-Journal.
In his statement on Nov. 3, Arnu said that an FBI search warrant was executed and his “laptops, phones, backup drives, camera gear and my drone were seized.”
Arnu told Business Insider (BI) that he had “not been charged with a crime,” adding that since the Nov. 3 search, he has “not heard from the FBI agent in charge at all, despite numerous attempts to reach him to discuss the damages and return of my items.”
In response to an inquiry from BI, Lt. Col. Bryon McGarry, with the U.S. Air Force stated minimally that: “Nellis Air Force Base is aware of the joint-AFOSI (Department of the Air Force Office of Special Investigations), FBI investigation involving Mr. Arnu.”
However, as non-informative as the Air Force was, the FBI declined to comment at all.
The Epoch Times reported further on the seemingly outrageous incident:
Elaborating to news outlets, Arnu said that some 15 to 20 federal agents arrived at his home in “full riot gear.” He said the search pertained to photos that were posted on his website.
“The doors were broken open and I in [sic] Rachel and my girlfriend in our Las Vegas home were detained and treated in the most disrespectful way,” he told Insider. “My girlfriend was led out into the street barefoot and only in her underwear in full view of our neighbors; I was led outside, handcuffed and only in t-shirt and sweats in sub-freezing temperatures.”
Arnu added: “I am not sharing anything on my web site that cannot be found on dozens of other web sites and news outlet publications. Considering how this went down I have no intention of removing any more material unless ordered to do so by a federal judge.”
In his interview with Insider and Fox News, Arnu said he will now pursue legal action against the federal government.
“The federal government has the right to harass and traumatize random citizens that are not accused of any crime,” Arnu told Fox on Saturday. “Kick in their doors, manhandle them and take whatever they want from them. Said citizens have no rights whatsoever to reimbursement of their damages, return of their property or compensation for the trauma they were subjected to.”
Arnu added to Fox that “this is America … land of the free.” But now, it’s “not so much from where I am standing right now. Everyone should know about this injustice. It could be your door that is kicked in next!”
The seizure of Arnu’s aerial video drone may hint at a potential motive for the raid, as there are signs all around the military installation warning that photography in the area is prohibited and that drones cannot be flown in its vicinity.
However, if that is the case, then the FBI and AF-OSI should tell Mr. Arnu this and make a public statement to that effect.
Either way, the storm-trooper-type armed raid used against a well-known, elderly amateur journalist is outrageous and just the latest example of the FBI’s increasingly heavy-handed tactics being employed against peaceful American citizens.
Add this to the long list of FBI abuses the new, GOP-led Congress must investigate in 2023.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
Secretary of Health Dr. Rachel Levine answering questions from the press. As states across the country begin to reopen and nearly half are seeing COVID-19 cases rise, Governor Tom Wolf announced Friday that Pennsylvania is not one of them. ...Today at a daily COVID briefing with Health Secretary Dr. Rachel Levine, he noted another milestone: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention proprietary data for states indicates that we are one of just three states that has had a downward trajectory of COVID- 19 cases for more than 42 days. The other two states are Montana and Hawaii. JUNE 17, 2020 - HARRISBURG, PA.
ANALYSIS – This is how the world ends, not with a bang, but a ‘misgendering.’
A recent podcast interview with the ex-Twitter censorship czar provides insight into the warped woke ‘logic’ behind insanely dangerous leftist censorship.
The illuminating comments were made by the former head of trust and safety at Twitter to defend the company’s earlier choice to suspend the Babylon Bee, a Christian satire outlet, for ‘misgendering’ a public official.
Misgendering is the new made-up woke term that refers to someone not calling someone else by their own totally made-up preferred gender identity.
And to the Left, this simple choice is a horrific act of brutality against a ‘vulnerable community’ and cannot be tolerated under any circumstances – “full stop.”
In the interview Yoel Roth stated:
“So let’s start from a premise that it’s fu**ed up. But then again let’s look at what Twitter’s written policies are, Twitter’s written policies prohibit misgendering, full stop. And the Babylon Bee, in the name of satire, misgendered Admiral Rachel Levine.”
Ex-Twitter safety chief Yoel Roth slammed conservative Twitter accounts during a discussion with journalist Kara Swisher that was later released on her Thursday podcast.
The Babylon Bee (The Bee) was suspended from Twitter after it made a joke at the expense of transgender Health and Human Services assistant secretary Dr. Rachel Levine, who identifies as a female.
The Bee had published a satirical piece congratulating the government official for being dubbed its “Man of the Year” for 2022.
While letting him know that she did not agree with Twitter’s choice to suspend The Bee, Swisher invited Roth to explain his company’s course of action at the time.
“It’s interesting to think about what the competing tensions around that are. I want to start by acknowledging that the targeting and the victimization of the trans community on Twitter is very real, very life-threatening, and extraordinarily serious,” Roth claimed.
“We have seen from a number of Twitter accounts, including LibsOfTikTok notably, that there are orchestrated campaigns that particularly are singling out a group that is already particularly vulnerable within society.”
He went on to say, “Not only is it not funny, but it is dangerous, and it does contribute to an environment that makes people unsafe in the world.”
The former Twitter official then went on to shield himself behind Twitter’s regulations, suggesting that his team was merely enforcing the rules on the books.
Well, not only are Roth’s comments outrageous nonsense, they are dangerous to all our freedoms.
It is a scientific fact that biological men and women cannot change sex. Despite every painful effort, they can only change their appearance.
Biology and chromosomes can’t be transformed, even if genitals and breasts can be mutilated, and supplemented by a lifetime regimen of drugs and hormone injections.
Of course, clothing, accessories, and behavior can also be adjusted and modified.
But, these are all essentially cosmetic, even when some are horribly invasive, changes.
Calling a biological man a man is simply scientific fact.
It is even more accurate when the man has not undergone any sexual transition procedures, but simply ‘identifies’ as a woman.
The same applies to women ‘identifying’ as men.
But banning ‘misgendering’ isn’t enough, Twitter’s Terms of Service continues the insanity by prohibiting ‘deadnaming’ transgender individuals.
‘Deadnaming’ is another newly made up woke term that refers to simply calling someone by the name they were known by prior to their deciding to identify with the opposite sex.
In the case of Rachel Levine, that means calling him Richard, his name for the majority of his male life.
Notice I just ‘misgendered,’ and ‘deadnamed’ Levine.
While on a personal level some of us may choose to accept the preferred gender identity, pronouns, or new name of a ‘transgender’ individual, out of courtesy or whatever other reason, that choice should not be dictated by Big Tech, or anyone else.
And doing so has created a dangerous new logic that the right of a ‘transgender’ individual to demand everyone use his or her gender identity, or new name, absolutely trumps all our rights to our own beliefs and our constitutional right to free speech.
And that is the most dangerous thing of all
Please note that new ‘Chief Twit’ Elon Musk has reinstated Twitter accounts, such as Babylon Bee, previously suspended for policy violations, Twitter’s terms of service still lay out the old rules about misgendering.
Musk needs to quickly, but carefully, change those rules. How he does that will set a new standard for how these issues should be dealt with by other platforms, and society in general. GAND
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
