Opinion

Home Opinion Page 39

Agent Who Took Bullet For Reagan Backs Secret Service After WHCA Dinner Chaos

4
By Series: Reagan White House Photographs, 1/20/1981 - 1/20/1989Collection: White House Photographic Collection, 1/20/1981 - 1/20/1989 - https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75856639, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=96625804

A Secret Service agent who literally took a bullet for President Ronald Reagan is now defending the agency after the shocking armed breach at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner.

Tim McCarthy — the agent wounded during the 1981 assassination attempt on Reagan — says critics need to cool it.

“I think we need to ratchet down the rhetoric just a little bit and give the Secret Service at the moment quite a bit of credit for doing a hell of a good job,” McCarthy said on NewsNation Live.

That’s no small endorsement.

McCarthy was among the agents protecting Reagan outside the Washington Hilton in March 1981 when would-be assassin John Hinckley Jr. opened fire. Reagan was hit by a bullet that ricocheted off his limousine, piercing his lung and causing massive internal bleeding. McCarthy, along with Press Secretary James Brady and others, was also struck — Brady left permanently disabled.

Now, more than four decades later, McCarthy is weighing in on another high-stakes moment at the very same hotel.

On Saturday night, an armed suspect stormed the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, where President Donald Trump was in attendance — sparking panic and fierce backlash online over security failures.

But McCarthy says the system worked.

“This guy really didn’t get too far,” he said. “He ran through the metal detectors… exchanged gunfire… wasn’t even on the same floor… and was tackled by an agent, never got to the stairs.”

Despite viral outrage — and even the suspect himself claiming there was “no damn security” — McCarthy emphasized the layered defense that stopped the threat cold.

“Now, security is in layers,” he explained, detailing how multiple levels of resistance stood between the gunman and the president, including counter-assault teams and SWAT units.

Bottom line: the shooter never got close.

“Security was tested, security responded, and at this point it did pretty well,” McCarthy said.

The Trump White House appears to agree.

Officials praised the Secret Service for quickly evacuating the president, vice president, and cabinet, while Chief of Staff Susie Wiles is set to review protocols going forward.

Still, critics have questioned whether more could have been done — including calls to lock down the entire hotel.

McCarthy dismissed that idea outright.

“Well, try finding a hotel with a ballroom if you’re going to shut the hotel down,” he said. “You’re not going to find one. No one’s going to want to do that.”

He also noted that security included multiple layers — possibly more than the standard three — and that the threat never reached the ballroom floor.

For McCarthy, who lived through one of the darkest days in presidential security history, the verdict is clear:

“So far, based on what I know, I’m pretty satisfied with what the Secret Service did on this occasion.”

The Washington Hilton hotel said is a statement Monday it was following “stringent” Secret Service protocols during Saturday’s White House Correspondents’ Association dinner.

“The ​hotel was operating under stringent security ​protocols for the property as directed by the ‌U.S. ⁠Secret Service, which led security,” a hotel spokesperson said in a statement, according to Reuters

The spokesperson reportedly added that the Secret Service coordinated with numerous security teams, including the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) in addition to hotel security. 

Hunter Biden Admits His ‘Bias’ Towards Pardons, Says Founders ‘Didn’t Imagine Trump’

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)

Hunter Biden is openly acknowledging what critics have argued for months: when it comes to his father’s sweeping pardon, he is anything but objective.

“I’m completely biased as it relates to what my dad did for me. I fully understand how uniquely situated I am in being privileged enough to have received a pardon from my father,” Hunter said in an interview published by liberal outlet MediasTouch.

The admission revives scrutiny over former President Joe Biden’s dramatic reversal on the issue. After repeatedly insisting he would not grant clemency to his son, Biden ultimately issued a sweeping pardon—undercutting Democrats’ long-standing “no one is above the law” message as Hunter faced serious federal charges.

Despite conceding his own bias, Hunter declined to weigh in on potential reforms to the presidential pardon system. Instead, he pivoted to attacking former President Donald Trump’s use of the same authority, pointing to the more than 1,000 individuals pardoned in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol protest.

Hunter Biden was granted an unusually broad pardon covering any offense he “has committed or may have committed” between Jan. 1, 2014, and Dec. 1, 2024—a scope that drew bipartisan criticism.

“I was filled with gratitude,” he said of his father’s decision.

The legal backdrop is significant. In September 2024, Hunter pleaded guilty to nine federal tax charges tied to a scheme that evaded more than $1.4 million in taxes. Months earlier, he was convicted in Delaware for lying about his drug use on a federal firearm purchase form.

Still, Hunter sought to shift the focus toward Trump and his family, saying, “I don’t think that the founders ever imagined Donald Trump. I don’t think they ever imagined the Trump family.”

He also attempted to contrast pardon totals: “I don’t think people understand is that, in the first year, I think—I don’t know the exact number—I think my dad gave 80 or so pardons over a four-year period of time. I think that that’s about the number.”

He added, “Donald Trump has given over 1,500 pardons in the first year alone. But I’m obviously—I’m not the one to be, I don’t think, fairly or unbiasedly talking about the presidential pardon vote.”

Trump, notably, did not pardon any of his children during his presidency, though he did grant clemency in 2020 to Charles Kushner, the father of his son-in-law.

The White House defended Trump’s record, with spokeswoman Abigail Jackson saying he has used his authority to pardon individuals who were victims of what she described as a “weaponized justice system.”

Jackson also criticized Biden’s final actions in office, arguing that “the only pardons anyone should be critical of are from President Autopen,” citing clemency for violent offenders and “proactive pardons he ‘signed’ for his family members like Hunter on his way out the door.”

In addition to Hunter, Biden issued pardons to several relatives, including his brother James, sister-in-law Sara, sister Valerie, and brother Francis—moves he framed as necessary protection against political retaliation.

READ NEXT: Congresswoman Resigns In Stunning Last-Minute Exit

Biden Pentagon ‘Diversity’ Push is Part of Radical Leftist Agenda, Harms US Warfighting

0
Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III speaks during the 2023 U.S.-Japan Security Consultative Committee meeting co-hosted with Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken hosting Japanese Foreign Minister Hayashi Yoshimasa and Japanese Defense Minister Hamada Yasukazu, at the Department of State. Washington, D.C., Jan 11, 2023. (DoD photo by U.S. Air Force Tech. Sgt. Jack Sanders)

ANALYSIS – The ‘Woke Wars’ at the Pentagon will be heating up now that Republicans have taken over the House of Representatives, but few know how bad the problem is.

And what exactly do we mean by ‘woke.’

Well, to me, woke is a catchall term invented by the left to describe a full spectrum of leftist and socialist agendas. Among them are diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI), better described as DIE.

DIE includes Critical Race Theory (CRT), anti-white racism, extreme feminism as well as the radical transgender agenda. 

All flow from the Frankfurt School of modern socialism and intend to radically transform our institutions and society along socialist lines.

Not only are these policies wrong, but in many cases, they are illegal and unconstitutional; they simply codify reverse discrimination and racism in violation of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.

Many of these concepts have thoroughly infected our colleges and universities and are being pushed down to even our high schools and grammar schools.

Some of this goes back to the 1980s, but most recently they have been pushed hard at the Pentagon by hardcore leftists with Team Clinton, Team Obama and now the same radicals with Team Biden.

This aggressive push for ‘diversity’ and the obsession with race totally undermines our military culture, where our troops are supposed to think less about our differences, not more.

As Michael Washburn of The Epoch Times writes:

The U.S. military’s increased push for diversity and inclusion, as reflected in the far-reaching National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) signed by President Joe Biden on Dec. 23, 2022, aims to remake the military’s culture and ethos along the same lines as left-wing policies that have been put to use at elite colleges and other areas of the private sphere, defense experts say.

While efforts to diversify the armed forces along racial and gender lines at the expense of traditional standards, aren’t new, the NDAA signals dramatically increased civilian input on and oversight of a culture once deemed to be the domain of professional soldiers, the experts told The Epoch Times.

Provisions of the NDAA that aim to boost diversity are so similar to policies enforced by private institutions, such as Harvard University, that an organization opposing the “woke” agenda in the armed forces, and supporting traditional standards and requirements [Veterans for Fairness and Merit- VFM], has gone so far as to lend its expertise in a lawsuit over Harvard’s admissions policies, in the form of an amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) filing (pdf), obtained by The Epoch Times. The filing argues that diversity and inclusion policies have harmed the military and aren’t a good idea in either the public or private spheres.

Part of Biden’s NDAA pushes illegal racial preferences in training and recruitment.

Scott McQuarrie, president of Veterans for Fairness and Merit (VFM), explains how bad this is: “[advocates of diversity] make this assertion that it’s a national security imperative that the military be allowed to use racial preferences in order to meet that high bar. Most people being candid with you would say that’s a very far-fetched argument.”

“In fact, our military has operated over the last few generations effectively without having to suspend the Constitution. In Bosnia, Panama, the Gulf War, Afghanistan, and Iraq, the military did quite well, and we don’t need to violate the Constitution for the military to execute its mission,” he added.

The Pentagon’s aggressive push for diversity and inclusion, as reflected in Biden’s far-reaching NDAA signed on Dec. 23, aims to radically transform the military’s culture and ethos along the same lines as left-wing policies that are ruining many colleges, corporations and civilian institutions.

They can’t be allowed to destroy our military, as they are destroying everything else. The GOP House needs to focus like a laser beam on these issues at the Defense Department, and private groups like VFM need to continue and ramp up their legal battle against DIE.

This is a war for the soul of our armed forces and our Republic.

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

How Was Someone Able To Get A Loaded Gun Into Trump National While Trump Was Playing?

1

A top legal watchdog is going to federal court to uncover documents on a major breach of President Donald Trump’s security.

The non-profit public interest law firm Judicial Watch announced in a statement that “it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for records related to an August 31, 2025, incident in which a club member allegedly carried a loaded semi-automatic handgun past Secret Service screening checkpoints at Trump National Golf Club in Virginia while President Donald Trump was on site.”

“It’s very disturbing that a security lapse of this magnitude could occur, particularly given recent threats against the president,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The public has a right to know how this happened and what is being done to prevent it from happening again.”

“According to reports, a club member was able to bring a loaded semi-automatic handgun onto the premises while Trump was present, after passing through Secret Service screening checkpoints. A Secret Service spokesperson said that handheld magnetometers were used instead of walkthrough devices when screening guests at the president’s golf resort, located about 25 miles northwest of the White House,” Judicial Watch reports.

“The agent in charge of searching the guest’s bag at the Sterling golf facility was placed on administrative leave amid an ongoing review by the Secret Service,” Judicial Watch notes.

Judicial Watch reports it “filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the U.S. Secret Service (USSS) failed to respond to a November 18, 2025, FOIA request for:”

All records related to the internal investigation of the August 31, 2025, incident at the Trump National Golf Club in Sterling, Virginia, in which a club member was able to get a semi-automatic hand gun into the club premises while the President was present without initial detection, including but not limited to investigative reports, agents’ notes, witness interview, audio-video recordings and other records. 

All emails and text messages sent between members of the Presidential protective detail regarding the August 31, 2025, incident at the golf club.

“Trump has survived multiple assassination attempts, including Butler, Pennsylvania Rally – July 13, 2024; West Palm Beach, Florida – September 15, 2024; and most recently at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, Washington, D.C. – April 25, 2026,” Judicial Watch points out.

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk.

Marines Urged by Woke Study to Use Gender-Neutral Terms in Boot Camp

8

ANALYSIS – In the most glaring example of wokeness in the military, which the Marine Commandant recently claimed wasn’t an issue in our beloved Corps, jarheads are being urged not to use sir or ma’am in Marine boot camp.

According to the Marine Corps Times, this is seen as part of a sweeping effort to avoid ‘misgendering’ drill instructors. This is something all Marines know has been a huge and pressing issue at boot camp for decades, as we have so many non-binary and trans drill instructors.

Please note my sarcasm.

The recommendation is part of a massive, recently completed, 738-page academic report from the University of Pittsburgh, which was commissioned by the Corps in 2020.

Instead of sir or ma’am the 22 University of Pittsburgh Academics that concocted the study – headed by biologists Bradley C. Nindl and Mita Lovalekar, recommend aspiring privates call their superiors by their last names. 

The study notes that other military branches have made strides to “de-emphasize gender” by using other names instead. 

The Marine Corps Times reports:

Instead of saying ‘ma’am’ or ‘sir,’ recruits in these Services refer to their drill instructors using their ranks or roles followed by their last names. Gendered identifiers prime recruits to think about or visually search for a drill instructor’s gender first, before their rank or role.

The far-left report is riddled with other woke ideas and includes a detailed study on improving gender integration at boot camp.

One important figure who thankfully appeared hesitant about this gender-neutral proposal was Col. Howard Hall, chief of staff for Marine Corps Training and Education Command.

Hall and others maintain that even if the Corps implements the change at its training facilities, recruits will then need to re-adapt to again addressing senior officers by ‘sir’ or ‘ma’am’ when they enter the fleet, as Marines in the real world would likely not enforce the rule.

 Hall told the Marine Corps Times, in slightly mangled terms, and some big words:

Honestly, that’s not a quick fix. What are inculcating in our young recruits that will or will not be reinforced when they graduate and enter the fleet Marine force? So again, we want to avoid any quick-fix solutions that introduce perturbations down the line.

And yes, while we all want to avoid ‘perturbations’ down the line, more importantly we want to avoid sheer idiocy right now.

Maybe our Marine officers should learn to be blunter.

This study also shows why the military needs to stop relying so much on outside consultants and academics, and their idiotic, ideologically-driven studies, to guide its policies.

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

On Twitter Show, Tucker Carlson Blames Ukraine for Attack on Dam

1
Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America,

ANALYSIS – In his Twitter Spaces debut Tuesday night, called “Tucker on Twitter,” former Fox News host Tucker Carlson immediately accused Ukraine of being responsible for the catastrophic attack on the Nova Kakhovka dam in Southern Ukraine.

And he may be right.

Ukraine and Russia have routinely accused each other of shelling the dam, the hydroelectric station and the nearby Zaporizhia nuclear power plant.

Both sides have blamed the other for the attack, in what appears to be a war crime. Kyiv blamed Moscow for the “terrorist attack,” but the Kremlin claimed that Ukraine had struck the dam to impact Russian-controlled Crimea’s water supplies.

As Newsweek reported, that is part of Tucker’s claim, too.

And, despite his spotty track record on speculation, in this case, he may be right. Or at least, the assumption that Russia is always the culprit is no longer valid.

Based on recent reporting, which I wrote about here, Ukraine may, in fact, have been responsible for the serious sabotage of the Nord Stream undersea gas pipelines in September 2022, which was long blamed on Russia.

This makes the always-blame Russia crowd look less credible. But that doesn’t mean Tucker’s always-blame-everyone-except-Russia approach is any better.

While on Fox, Tucker repeatedly blamed the United States and Joe Biden for being behind the Nord Stream attack.

On Feb. 24 he said: “So the Biden administration committed the single largest most profound act of industrial terrorism of sabotaging history. They blew up the Nord Stream pipeline …”

And that has always been a stretch. Instead, The Post reporting today reinforces my earlier conclusion that it is “likely, the U.S. was aware but turned a blind eye.”

Thus, as far as we can tell, Biden knew about it beforehand but was unwilling or unable to do anything about it.

Tucker’s claims aren’t helped when he spouts pro-Russian talking points in his video, such as:

The Kakhovka dam was effectively Russian. It was built by the Russian government. It currently sits in Russian- controlled territory. The dam’s reservoir supplies water to Crimea, which has been for the last 240 years home of the Russian Black Sea Fleet.

Firstly, the ‘Soviets’ built the dam during the USSR, not the ‘Russians,’ and the USSR no longer exists. Secondly, it doesn’t matter how long Russia’s Black Sea Fleet was based in Crimea; it belongs to Ukraine because that’s what happened when the USSR dissolved in 1991 and Ukraine became independent.

Tucker’s Trumpian personal insults, like describing Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, as a “sweaty and rat-like comedian-turned-oligarch,” probably don’t help his credibility much either.

Tucker is on firmer ground when he argues that: “Blowing up the dam may be bad for Ukraine, but it hurts Russia more, and for precisely that reason, the Ukrainian government has considered destroying it.”

Especially when he cites a December report from The Washington Post in which a Ukrainian general spoke of using U.S.-made HIMARS launchers to “test strike” on the Kakhovka dam.

So, what are the facts?

The dam spanning the Dnipro River was breached on Tuesday, flooding swaths of territory and threatening crucial water supplies to Europe’s largest nuclear power plant.

At least 42,000 people and 1,500 square miles of land are at risk from the flooding caused by the destruction of the dam, likely slowing any potential Ukrainian military advance in the Dnipro River delta.

Much of the Dnipro River delta will become inaccessible for land operations, raising suspicions that Russia deliberately sabotaged the dam to prevent an expected Ukrainian counteroffensive.

However, the flooding has disproportionately affected the Russian-occupied side of the river.

The Kakhovka reservoir does supply Russian-occupied Kherson Oblast and the Crimea peninsula with fresh water.

Zelensky has said that the only way to destroy the dam is through mining and explosives and emphasized that Russian forces have now occupied the dam for over a year.

In a statement, Ukraine’s Southern Operational Command said, “Russian occupation troops blew up the dam” at Nova Kakhovka in the Kherson region.

Blaming “Russian terrorists” for the attack, Zelensky said on Twitter that “the destruction of the Kakhovka hydroelectric power plant dam only confirms for the whole world that they must be expelled from every corner of Ukrainian land.”

In the end, Tucker may be right. Ukraine could have been behind the attack. 

But he is far more credible when he is less bombastic and emphatic with his theories. Such as when he states:

So really, once the facts start coming in, it becomes much less of a mystery what might have happened to the dam, and a fair person would conclude that the Ukrainians probably blew it up, just as you would assume they blew up Nord Stream, the Russian natural gas pipeline last fall.

Tucker ended his new Twitter show by promising to be back with “much more, very soon.” I’m looking forward to it.

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

Deadly Mexican Drug Cartels Using Biden’s Open Border to Cause Chaos in US

5
CBP Photography, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

ANALYSIS – Totally ignored or hidden by the establishment media is how powerful and deadly Mexican drug cartels are using Joe Biden’s deliberately open border to access the United States and cause chaos.

They do this in various ways. One of course is their bread and butter — drugs. 

The cartels have drastically ramped up their supply of drugs to the U.S., especially deadly fentanyl, since Biden took office. 

This is shown by the record number of fentanyl captures at or near the Mexican border.

But they are also clearly involved in human trafficking and in sending operatives to swell the ranks of their already large criminal networks inside our country.

These organized criminal networks distribute drugs, are involved in human sex trafficking, and many other serious crimes (potentially including terrorism), all within our borders. 

The Republican-led House must do all it can to investigate and thwart Biden’s damaging border policies beginning in January.

Beyond the difficult political task of ending Biden’s disastrous border and immigration policies while he remains in office, and the Democrats control the Senate, there are other measures that could be taken.

In an opinion piece for Fox News, Robert S. Wells, a retired U.S. Navy Captain, and former Special Advisor to Vice President Dick Cheney explain one way to help our law enforcement and Homeland Security team fight back.

This involves revamping the National Security Council (NSC) at the White House to properly address the cartel threat by “connecting the dots.”

Wells notes that:

Every day the leadership in the Homeland Security and Justice Departments receive comprehensive reports from the Intelligence Community (IC), but those findings fail to translate into effective policy and strategy that strengthens our network against the cartels.

Those findings include the “known-known” Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) reports on drug cartel distribution of fentanyl distribution and the limitations of Customs and Border Protection (CBP)’s capability to scale to address the threat.

Unfortunately, under Biden, despite this deluge of valuable intel, these law enforcement agencies are not organized to use the information to succeed in an organized response.

Wells then recommends using a revised version of President GW Bush’s Executive Order 13228 to coordinate the fight against the cartels at the NSC.

That order, which created the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was signed after the terror attacks on 9/11 2001 precisely to help our Intelligence Community (IC) “connect the dots” after a massive intelligence failure allowed al-Qaeda terrorists to fly jetliners into the Twin Towers in New York City, the Pentagon, and almost one into the Capitol.

The order also created the Homeland Security Council (HSC) within the Executive Office of the President.

Sadly, in the Biden NSC, Homeland Security has been downgraded, and coordinating the fight against the cartels now has to compete with Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea. 

Wells states that a revised Executive Order 13228 could be drafted and implemented by Biden in a day and a new newly established Homeland Security Council could be up and operational within a week:

Once established, the IC and agency professionals at Justice (DEA), Defense (SOUTHCOM), Homeland Security (CBP and USCG) can bring forward their recommendations against the cartels and their networks throughout the US.

This focus would help “connect the dots” through strategic communication that provides Colin Powell-style efficiency using a macro slide that illustrates the cartel networks operating in the US, the top 3 focal points to “cut off and kill” the cartel networks and executive authority to surge homeland security task forces to the top three areas.

Once rebooted, the office of the Homeland Security Adviser would be able to strategically communicate and lead efforts to “connect the dots” on the growing drug cartel threat.

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

Amanda Head: Who’s Your Pick For 2024 – Trump or DeSantis?

6

As Americans continue to wait for official midterm results to trickle in Republicans are already diving themselves into two camps: Ron DeSantis or Donald Trump.

Who are you siding with?

Watch Amanda break it down below.

House Conservative Explains Why Big Beautiful Bill Was Big Ugly Spending Spree

2

A leading House conservative and member of the Budget Committee used his time in a committee hearing on the so-called “Big Beautiful Bill” spending package to explain that the bill does little to reform spending and the supposed spending cuts are pushed to future years, giving future congresses and the next president time to repeal them.

Texas Republican Rep. Chip Roy explained that while the bill does deliver tax relief it dramatically increases budget deficits by putting off spending reform:

“I appreciate my friend from Texas, the chairman, and you know, my Democratic colleagues keep telling things that are not true. The vast majority of Americans will get tax benefits under this bill. It’s just simply false to say that that’s not true. Hardworking Americans who will benefit from the standard deduction increase, hardworking Americans who will benefit from child tax credits and lower tax rates—stop saying things that aren’t true. Those things are true. The fact is, we have money in here for the border to undo the damage of Joe Biden. We have more money in here for defense to undo the damage of Joe Biden, but we also address Medicaid and Medicaid spending goes up. Stop lying. Medicaid spending goes up. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle are profoundly unserious when it comes to being real about what’s happening with the numbers. I applaud Chairman Arrington. I applaud my colleagues on this side of the aisle for taking a step forward in dealing with the spending problem in this town.

But I have to now admonish my colleagues on this side of the aisle: this bill falls profoundly short. It does not do what we say it does with respect to deficits. The fact of the matter is, on the spending, what we’re dealing with here is tax cuts and spending a massive front-loaded deficit increase. That’s the truth. That’s the truth. Deficits will go up in the first half of the 10-year budget window. And we all know it’s true, and we shouldn’t do that. We shouldn’t say that we’re doing something we’re not doing.

The fact of the matter is, this bill has back-loaded savings and front-loaded spending, nowhere near the Senate Budget top line, by the way. The Senate Budget top line of six and a half trillion dollars, which, by the way, is what we were pre-COVID, inflation-adjusted, on interest, on Medicare and Social Security. And if we would reform Medicaid, we could actually get to the core of the problem, but we refuse to do it. And I’m not going to sit here and say that everything is hunky-dory when this is the Budget Committee. This is the Budget Committee. We are supposed to do something to actually result in balanced budgets, but we’re not doing it. Look at what happens under deficits… Only in Washington are we expected to bet on the come that in five years, everything will work, then we will solve the problem.

We have got to change the direction of this town, and to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle: yes, that means touching Medicaid. It went from $400 billion in 2019 to $600 billion this year. It’ll be over a trillion in the 2030s. We are making promises that we cannot keep. We do need to reform it. We need to stop giving seven times as much money to the able-bodied over the vulnerable. Why are we sticking it to the vulnerable population, the disabled and the sick, to give money to single able-bodied male adults? We shouldn’t do that. We should reform it. But guess what? That message needs to be delivered to my colleagues on this side of the aisle too.

We are writing checks we cannot cash, and our children are going to pay the price. So I am a no on this bill unless serious reforms are made today, tomorrow, Sunday. We’re having conversations as we speak, but something needs to change, or you’re not going to get my support.”

‘Transnational Repression’ – FBI ‘Very Concerned’ by Illegal Chinese ‘Police Stations’ in US and Abroad

4
Joe Biden via Gage Skidmore Flickr

ANALYSIS – Highlighting the real domestic security threat by China, the FBI is apparently ‘very concerned’ about, and investigating, the alleged Chinese Communist (Chicom) police stations likely set up illegally in New York, among other cities.

This is yet another domestic security failure by a Biden administration obsessed with Jan 6 and persecuting conservatives instead of combatting real foreign threats to the nation.

I have written about these dangerous and repressive Chicom police outposts in the U.S., Canada, and elsewhere before.  

While ostensibly run by China’s Ministry of Interior via its police forces, and using ‘volunteers,’ the feared Chinese Ministry of State Security (MSS) – which is both an intelligence and security service – is likely heavily involved with this effort.

China claims the outposts are merely police service centers to help Chinese ex-pats living abroad. 

But if you believe that, there is also a bridge for sale in Brooklyn.

These outposts are mostly being used to monitor, coerce, and sometimes forcibly remove Chinese dissidents living overseas.

The heightened scrutiny on them follows a September report by Safeguard Defenders, a Europe-based human rights organization, that revealed the existence of dozens of Chinese police ‘service stations’ in major cities around the world, including New York.

Safeguard Defenders reported that China has set up at least 54 “overseas police service stations” around the world, including one in New York City and three in Toronto. The group said its list was based on official statements, but the actual number may be higher.

While tasked with cracking down on Chinese-related illegal activities overseas, the police stations represent “the latest iteration in [China’s] growing transnational repression, where it seeks to police and limit political expression far beyond its own borders,” the report said.

While congressional Democrats obsessed myopically on Jan 6, Republicans in Congress have taken this Chicom threat seriously, requesting answers from Team Biden administration about their legality and influence.

And finally, we see some response.

As Reuters reported, Thursday, FBI Director Christopher Wray told lawmakers at the U.S. Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing that he is “very concerned about this. We are aware of the existence of these stations.” 

However, Wray declined to detail the FBI’s investigations into this threat.

Wray added: 

I have to be careful about discussing our specific investigative work, but to me, it is outrageous to think that the Chinese police would attempt to set up shop, you know, in New York, let’s say, without proper coordination. It violates sovereignty and circumvents standard judicial and law enforcement cooperation processes.

When asked by Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., if such stations violated U.S. law, Wray said the FBI was “looking into the legal parameters of it” and had talked to the Justice Department and the Department of State about unsanctioned operations.

Wray added that the United States has indicted a number of Chinese government assets involved in harassing, stalking, surveilling, and blackmailing opponents of China’s leader-for-life Xi Jinping who are living in the United States.

Many of these indicted assets were involved in a notorious Chicom effort to repatriate Chinese dissidents back to China known as “Operation Fox Hunt.”

“It’s a real problem and something that we’re talking with our foreign partners about, as well, because we’re not the only country where this has occurred,” Wray said.

According to AP most of the Chinese overseas police stations are concentrated in Europe. 

The Irish government said last month it had asked China to shut down a police station operating in Dublin. The Dutch government said it was looking into whether two stations named in the report were established in the Netherlands.

In the two months since the Safeguard Defenders’ report was released, at least 14 governments, including those of Britain, Canada and Germany, have opened investigations into the operations, according to Safeguard Defenders.

VOA News reported that:

In response to China’s increased use of transnational repression, the Biden administration has adopted a whole-of-government approach that includes visa restrictions, export controls, and the investigation and prosecution of perpetrators, Uzra Zeya, undersecretary of state for civilian security, democracy and human rights, told a congressional panel in June.

These are all good first steps, but much more needs to be done to neutralize China’s extraterritorial repression in the U.S. and allied nations. 

And do so quickly.

Among additional moves, Team Biden must pressure all the nations listed as having extraterritorial Chinese police stations. This includes Germany, which sees no issues with the Chicom police outpost there.

But as with its meekness in facing Russia, Germany has a history of turning a blind eye to the threat posed by the Chinese Communists as well.

It’s time the U.S. makes a very public example of ‘delinquent’ Germany, as President Trump did earlier. 

But don’t expect this current administration to do much.

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