Random

    Opinion

    Home Opinion Page 39

    Army Special Ops Command Proudly Flies ‘Pride’ Flag

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    1
    Marcha del orgullo en Paraná, Entre Ríos, Argentina. Noviembre de 2021 via Wikimedia commons

    ANALYSIS – Please just stop! – Even as the U.S. armed services toned down their politically driven, identity and sexual politics pandering for Pride Month this year, it seems the commanding general of U.S. Army Special Operations Command (also known as ARSOC) didn’t get the memo.

    Please note that ARSOC (or USASOC) includes some of our finest warriors, including the 75th Ranger Regiment, Army Special Forces (Green Berets) and 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment-Delta (or Delta Force – the Army’s equivalent of the Navy SEALs).

    In what I consider an obscene post across multiple social media accounts, including Twitter, Instagram and Facebook, the commander of ARSOC, Lt. Gen. Jonathan P. Braga, either knowingly, or unknowingly, allowed his public affairs peons to celebrate Pride Month with the most bizarre leftist flag there is – as of now.

    It’s the “intersex-inclusive Pride Progress” flag.

    I say “as of now” because we have come a long way from a simple rainbow flag to represent gays. As I wrote earlier, the latest Pride flag, along with the leftist ideology that it’s based on, is constantly morphing.

    It first added black and brown stripes to represent the Black Lives Matter (BLM) racial agenda. Then it added pink and baby blue for transgenderism, only to add purple and yellow for those who call themselves nonbinary.

    And it is daily adding more elements and colors as the movement expands to include everything the left now advocates, even if it makes less sense each time.

    The intersex symbol on this flag is the left’s latest add. It is a purple circle on a yellow background in the chevron on the left of the flag.

    And it seems totally redundant.

    Brietbart explains:

    According to an article from Boston University, “intersex” is defined as “those whose bodies do not align with the gender binaries of males or females. This includes those with both genitals or other differences.” The colors yellow and purple are meant to be seen as “nonbinary colors,” the article stated.

    The flag also included light blue, pink, and white, which, according to the article, represent, respectively, boys, girls, and “those who are transitioning, have no gender, or are gender neutral.”

    This latest ‘intersex-inclusive Pride Progress’ flag is not only bizarre and visually hideous, but it also represents an extreme left-wing political and sexual ideology that divides us instead of uniting us.

    The ARSOC post also made the oft-repeated claim that: “Throughout American history, LGBTQ+ members have not only fought for the right to serve openly, but have also fought in every major war and conflict.”

    I tweeted my own reply to that, asking for the names of just a couple of specific LGBT individuals from every conflict and noted that I was especially interested in those that were T.

    I doubt too many intersex transgenders fought at Yorktown or Gettysburg. Or even WWII or Korea.

    Breitbart also posted some comments to the ARSOC post that pointed out we already have one all-inclusive flag:

    A former Green Beret posted in response: “And you jackasses wonder why the military as a whole can’t even meet its recruiting goals? There’s only one flag you should be proud of, the one we fought under and many of our brothers and sisters died under.”

    It continued:

    Sara Carter, Fox News Contributor and host of the Sara Carter Show, blasted the command’s posts, tweeting:

    .@USASOCNews
    My husband was in Special Operations Command for more than 16 years and continued to serve beyond – but he fought for the American flag not the LGBTQ flag

    See, here’s the problem – The American flag represents all Americans and the rights we cherish – we don’t need the bizarre multi-colored flag to appreciate freedom my husband and so many others (gay or not) risked their lives for or lost their lives for – your priorities are so F’ked up

    Indeed, we should only fly one flag – the American flag. It’s the one we fight for, and it includes all of us.

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

    Forget China, You Can Now Take a Balloon to Edge of Space

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    0
    Image via Pixabay free images

    ANALYSIS – Until now, only billionaires could afford to enter sub-orbital space. And it needed to be by high-powered rocket (think Jeff Bezos in his Blue Origin, or Richard Branson in his Virgin Galactic). 

    Star Trek actor William Shatner also did a flight on a Blue Origin’s rocket.

    But now you too can see the earth from 20 miles high. It will cost you just over $120,000 and it’s by a high-altitude balloon.

    And, no, it’s not aboard a Chinese spy balloon. These will be private companies running the trips.

    The billionaires in rockets still have one treat we can’t get – they can briefly experience weightlessness. They also go twice as high.

    Space officially starts at the Karman line, 62 miles above the earth’s surface. But for most people there won’t be that much of a difference.

    And at half the price, no training required, and a much softer, smoother ride, these edge-of-space balloons will be far more accessible and may become popular among the slightly less rich.

    And unlike the rockets, these balloons will give you a much longer ride, with luxury amenities, food, and drink.

    There now appears at least two companies on the verge of launching these space balloon trips. One is American and the other is French.

    Both seem to avoid mention of the 1937 Hindenburg hydrogen-filled dirigible disaster.

    The French company Zephalto with its Celeste balloon will provide Michelin-starred fine dining. It is partnered with France’s national space agency.

    These balloons filled with helium or hydrogen will depart from France with two pilots on board and six passengers and rise 15.5 miles into the stratosphere.

    Once at peak altitude, the balloon, carrying a pressurized capsule, will stay aloft for three hours, giving guests a chance to take in views previously seen only by astronauts. While in the air, passengers will be served high-end French food and wines.

    These near-space rides will start at €120,000 ($132,000) per person in 2025, Bloomberg reports.

    The other option will be Florida-based Space Perspective, which is testing its own passenger balloon, designed to reach the edge of space.

    Eight civilians and a pilot will be able to comfortably travel up 100,000 feet (19 miles) to near space in a reusable pressurized capsule carried by a gigantic hydrogen-filled balloon called Spacecraft Neptune – because Neptune’s atmosphere is predominantly hydrogen.

    The company operates out of leased facilities at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center, but plans to expand to Alaska and Hawaii, and then possibly to other countries around the world.

    Flight will cost about $125,000 per person. And it plans to launch a year earlier than the Celeste.

    Neptune’s ride will be similar to the Zephalto balloons, ascending at a sedate 12.5 miles per hour. It will give passengers two full hours to observe 360° views of Earth rotating beneath them and space above.

    The overall ride will last six hours – two hours to ascend, two hours to float along the stratosphere, and two hours to descend into the Atlantic Ocean, where a recovery ship will be waiting.

    The capsule comes complete with luxury seating, refreshments, a restroom, and Wi-Fi (so you can post to Instagram or live stream on Facebook as you fly – because – of course). The company plans to offer flights for weddings, corporate events, and scientific excursions.

    Its flights are scheduled to begin in 2024, but the first batch of 600 tickets is already sold out.

    Bon voyage. No smoking aboard.

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

    Biden’s DHS Misinforms Congress About its Orwellian ‘Disinformation’ Board

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    4
    The White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

    ANALYSIS – As Republican senators try to conduct oversight over, and gain insight into, the outrageous, and supposedly now defunct, ‘Disinformation Governance Board’ at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Team Biden is blocking the senators at every step.

    The board was dismantled under pressure in August following the recommendation of the Homeland Security Advisory Council. 

    However, many are concerned that DHS will continue with its dangerously un-American efforts under a different name.

    And now they are clearly afraid of what nefarious collusion with Big Tech the senators might uncover. 

    So, as always, covering up is the next step when faced with hard questions and the great disinfectant called sunlight.

    In this case, Team Biden is censoring its own documents which may describe its actions ‘prodding’ social media companies to censor conservative Americans under the guise of controlling ‘disinformation.’

    Biden’s DHS essentially ‘misinformed’ Congress by totally redacting (censoring) large portions of documents requested by Sens. Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Josh Hawley of Missouri back in June.

    These documents mostly related to the ‘Truth Board’s’ cozy relationship with social media platforms.

    This issue is particularly critical now in light of recent revelations of collusion between the FBI and these same platforms, and the obscene partisan censorship done at Twitter in apparent coordination with the White House, as revealed by Elon Musk.

    In a letter sent Thursday to embattled DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, Grassley and Hawley said the Department of Homeland Security heavily redacted documents they had requested six months ago.

    The letter read: 

    Based on our review of this material, it appears that many of the redactions are applied to pre-decisional and deliberative process material. We remind you that the oversight letters we send to the Executive Branch are signed in our capacity as sitting members of Congress, a separate and co-equal branch of government.

    Newsmax reported:

    Grassley and Hawley then said they would formally renew their requests to the department, as it is still “impossible to know the full extent to which various DHS components and offices are engaged in DHS’s ‘burgeoning’ counter-disinformation efforts.”

    “Please provide full and complete responses to all questions contained in our June 7, 2022, letter,” the two wrote, adding that they would also like “a detailed description of DHS’s policy for responding to congressional oversight requests.”

    The letter comes months after the White House canned the project due to substantial backlash, officially citing a recommendation from the Homeland Security Advisory Council, according to a press release.

    “With the HSAC recommendations as a guide, the Department will continue to address threat streams that undermine the security of our country consistent with the law while upholding the privacy, civil rights and civil liberties of the American people and promoting transparency in our work,” the statement read.

    Let’s hope that these senators will soon get the unredacted documents, so we can all learn what was really going on inside Biden’s dark attempt to create its own Orwellian ‘Ministry of Truth.’ 

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

    Legal Theorists Try To Attack Trump. Their Argument May Be Dead On Arrival.

    By
    Norman Leahy
    -
    4
    Donald Trump via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    A novel legal theory from two conservative legal scholars published in the University of Pennsylvania Law Review that a section of the 14th Amendment makes Donald Trump ineligible to run for president may be getting a court hearing in Florida.

    As Ballot Access news editor emeritus Richard Winger notes:

    On August 24, a Florida voter, Lawrence Caplan, filed a federal lawsuit seeking to bar former President Donald Trump from being placed on 2024 ballots as a presidential candidate. Caplan v Trump, s.d., 0:23cv-61618.

    Caplan, who appears to be representing himself in the case, writes:

    Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which provides for the disqualification of an individual who commits insurrection against our government has remained on the books for some one hundred and fifty plus years without ever facing question as to its legitimacy. While one can certainly argue that it has not been thoroughly tested, that fact is only because we have not faced an insurrection against our federal government such as the one while we faced on January 6, 2021. It should also be noted that President Trump has since made statements to the effect that should he be elected, he would advocate the total elimination of the US Constitution and the creation of a new charter more in line with his personal values.

    Winger believes Caplan’s suit is “misguided:”

    The Fourteenth Amendment “insurrection clause” bars individuals from being sworn in to certain offices, but it does not bar them from seeking the office. When the Fourteenth Amendment was passed, there was no mechanism to prevent any voter from voting for any candidate.

    Caplan appears to be taking the law review article’s authors, William Baude and Michael Stokes Paulson, at their word:

    “No official should shrink from these duties. It would be wrong — indeed, arguably itself a breach of one’s constitutional oath of office — to abandon one’s responsibilities of faithful interpretation, application, and enforcement of Section Three,” Bode and Paulsen write.

    Alternatively, ordinary citizens could file challenges on the same grounds with state election officials themselves.

    And other such suits may emerge over the coming weeks. I’m not convinced any federal judge will be willing to read Section 3 like Baude and Paulson say it should be. It’s not because the Section’s words aren’t clear – they are.

    My concerns are akin to those of Cato’s Walter Olsen, who writes:

    …no one should assume that just because Baude and Paulsen have made a powerful intellectual case for their originalist reading, that the Supreme Court will declare itself convinced and disqualify Trump. Justice Antonin Scalia memorably described himself as a “faint‐​hearted originalist,” which captures something important about the thinking of almost every Justice—if overruling a wrongly decided old case threatens to disrupt settled expectations to the point of spreading chaos and grief through society, most of them will refrain. Stare decisis, and a general preference for continuity in law, still matters.

    Exactly. While some judges may nurse images of themselves as bold crusaders for justice, most jurists aren’t eager to upset established practice and precedent on a whim. Though, to be fair to the times when such upsets have occurred – Brown v. Board of Education, for example, or Griswold v. Connecticut – have been warranted, necessary, and beneficial.

    Does that apply in the Caplan case? A court will decide. But as I’ve long said about Trump, the only court he cares about is public opinion. If voters reject him, that will carry more weight and sanction than any court could ever deliver.

    The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk. It first appeared in American Liberty News. Republished with permission.

    Trump Family Member Reveals Why She Will ‘Never’ Get Into Politics

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    1

    While politics might run in the family, one Trump is staying far away…

    President Donald Trump’s granddaughter, Kai, who is slated to play college golf next fall at the University of Miami, said she has no interest in following in her grandfather’s footsteps.

    “To be honest with you, I stay out of politics completely. I would never run, I don’t want anything to do with politics,” Trump said during an appearance on Logan Paul’s podcast. “I feel like politics is such a dangerous thing, and I think if both sides met in the middle, everyone would be so much more happier.”

    Trump said people have gotten “too extreme” on both sides of the coin, and social media has driven people to hone in on their beliefs.

    “There’s not a lot of things on social media where you’re very much in the middle. And I think that kind of makes some people crazy and some people buy into it too much,” Trump added. “I think that’s like the best way to say it. There’s no bad blood. I’m very much in the middle and kind of like, it is what it is. They ran against each other [Trump and Kamala Harris]. Obviously, I’m gonna support my grandpa, my family member, but that’s pretty much it.”

    The closest Trump has dove into the political waters was when she spoke at the Republican National Convention just days after her grandfather was shot in Butler, Pennsylvania.

    In an interview with Fox News Digital in October, Trump said she was “proud” of her grandfather after he brokered the historic ceasefire between Israel and Hamas.

    “Always will support him. I think he’s doing amazing things,” she said.

    White Kai Trump may not be interested in politics the same can’t be said for her father, Donald Trump Jr., who has been floated as a future presidential contender. Don Jr, the eldest of the two sons Trump had with Ivana, channels his father’s combative style and is viewed by many as a bridge between Trump’s base.

    The Independent reports:

    Back in August, a McLaughlin & Associates survey had Vance sitting pretty at 36 per cent, with Donald Trump Jr a distant second at 16 per cent. By October, that gap had narrowed, with [VP] Vance at 38 per cent and Trump Jr at 20 per cent (Rubio was in third place at 7 per cent). Then came the November poll, which probably sent shockwaves through Vance’s inner circle: the vice president’s support had slipped to 34 per cent, while Trump Jr had surged.

    “I’m a Second Amendment person, and I don’t know anything about Vance’s position on it,” says Liz Mair, veteran Republican strategist. “For a real Second Amendment voter, the only people I would truly be comfortable supporting right now would be Donald Trump Jr or Ron DeSantis. And I’d probably be more comfortable with Donald Trump Jr. It depends on each state, but for diehard gun voters, it’s a significant issue, and it was one reason Trump Sr had challenges in 2016.”

    Trump Jr has played his hand with characteristic bravado, dismissing speculation in one media organisation that he intends to run. “I’m actually glad you’re printing this bulls**t,” he wrote on X, “because at least now the rest of the press corps will see how s****y your ‘sources’ are and how easily you’re played by them. Congrats, moron.”

    Yet, as is often the case in this family, denials are never absolute. In May 2025, when asked at a panel in Qatar if he would “pick up the reins” after Trump leaves office, he replied: “I don’t know. Maybe one day, you know, that calling is there.” Junior wields that ambiguity like a political weapon – a constant reminder that another Trump is waiting in the wings.

    This race is a coin flip and Vivek NEEDS your help. Vivek Ramaswamy is defending the fundamental truths of America but he can’t do it alone. Join the fight and donate today!

    Amanda Head: Disney Stocks Tank Again!

    By
    Amanda Head
    -
    5

    Yikes.

    Disney has faced quite a tumultuous year after wading into politics and siding with the woke gender mob.

    Watch Amanda break down the latest controversy below:

    Is Vivek Ramaswamy The GOP’s New Trump ‘Lite’?

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    13
    Vivek Ramaswamy speaking with attendees at the 2022 AmericaFest at the Phoenix Convention Center in Phoenix, Arizona.

    ANALYSIS- Who is this skinny guy with the funny-sounding name? (That was his opening line at the debate). Vivek Ramaswamy wasn’t supposed to be at the center of the first Republican presidential candidate debate in Milwaukee.

    Ron DeSantis was supposed to be the viable GOP alternative to Donald Trump. A two-term governor of the third most populous state in the union, DeSantis, a Navy veteran who served in Iraq, is as conservative as they come.

    And he has a proven track record of fighting the left in Florida – and winning.

    But despite his solid bona fides and resume, DeSantis has a personality problem. He just doesn’t exude charm or confidence, and that’s hurting him – a lot.

    Meanwhile, Ramaswamy the 38-year-old Trump-defending, Cincinnati-born, biotech billionaire (worth at least $950 million), son of Pakistani immigrants, kind of stole the show at the debate.

    According to former FBI agent and body language expert, Joe Navarro: “[Ramaswamy] consistently looked the most comfortable on stage.”

    He was also the most openly and unabashedly pro-Trump. He was the first candidate to raise their hand when asked who would support the former President as the party nominee even if he is convicted on felony charges that he’s facing.

    He has also promised to pardon Trump if elected. But he went even farther than that.

    “President Trump, I believe, was the best president of the 21st century,” Ramaswamy said in a clip from the debate Trump posted on Truth Social.

    And Trump loved it.

    “This answer gave Vivek Ramaswamy a big WIN in the debate because of a thing called TRUTH. Thank you, Vivek!”

    The ever-smiling political newbie Ramaswamy, who seemed to be having a blast on stage, was also the target of many of his GOP rivals.

    As TIME reported:

    Maybe it was Ramaswamy’s consistent and confounding defense of All Things Trump. Maybe it was his smooth talk and culture-war acumen. Maybe it was just the fact that Ramaswamy frankly does not care how things were done before and might just have enough self-made money to go the distance.

    Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie snarled that he had “had enough already tonight of a guy who sounds like ChatGPT,” an A.I. battery. He then dismissed Ramaswamy as someone on the same level as a political figure universally loathed in the GOP. “The last person in one of these debates… who stood in the middle of the stage and said, ‘What is a skinny guy with an odd last name doing up here?’ was Barack Obama. And I am afraid we are dealing with the same type of amateur standing on the stage tonight,” Christie said.

    But the quick witted Ramaswamy’s riposte to Christie was a zinger: “Give me a hug like you did to Obama, and you’ll help elect me just like you did to Obama. Give me the damn hug, brother.”

    Ramaswamy was referring to the 2012 incident when Christie was accused of “hugging” Obama during his visit in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy which hit days before the 2012 presidential election.

    It’s a claim that Christie has been denying since then, saying: “I didn’t hug him.”

    Photos at the time seem to back up Christie, but the zinger still worked.

    Former U.S. Ambassador to the UN under Trump, and ex-South Carolina governor, Nikki Haley, who is of Indian descent, hit Ramaswamy too: “You have no foreign policy experience, and it shows.”

    I would agree with that assessment and believe he has made a few deeply flawed important national security statements – including on Ukraine and Israel.

    But he is super smart and can learn quickly.

    Then Vice President Mike Pence took a Christie-like jab at Ramaswamy, attacking the very same quality that originally helped raise Trump in the GOP base – that he is not a politician.

    “Now it’s not the time for on-the-job training,” retorted Pence. “We don’t need to bring in a rookie. We don’t need to bring in people with no experience.”

    AS TIME noted: “Attacks during debates are the norm but this was different. Ramaswamy’s competitors really don’t like him. Not even a little.”

    However, there is one important GOP rival who seems to like Ramaswamy – Donald Trump. And that could be all that matters.

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

    Conservative Pundit Walks Off Washinton Post Live Show

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    3
    Daniel X. O'Neil from USA, CC BY 2.0 via Wikimedia Commons

    Tensions are running high…

    On Friday, Conservative radio host and political pundit Hugh Hewitt stormed off a Washington Post live event after an argument over former President Trump’s rhetoric on election integrity ahead of Election Day.

    “Is it me or does it seem like Donald Trump is laying the ground work for contesting the election,” Post host Jonathan Capehart asked Ruth Marcus, who was appearing with Hewitt as part of the live event. “By claiming that cheating was taking place, but suing Bucks County [Pennsylvania] for alleged irregularities … ”

    Marcus replied Trump has been “laying the ground work” to contest the election for months, setting Hewitt off.

    “Jonathan, I’ve gotta speak up,” he tried to interject.

    “Let Ruth finish, Hugh,” Capehart shot back.

    “Well, I’ve just got to say, we’re news people, even though it’s the opinion section,” Hewitt said after Marcus finished. “It’s got to be reported. Bucks County was reversed by the court and instructed to open up extra days because they violated the law and told people to go home. So, that lawsuit was brought by the Republican National Committee, and it was successful. The Supreme Court ruled that Glenn Youngkin was successful,” he added, referring to the GOP Virginia governor’s efforts to purge some 1,600 people from the voter rolls.

    “We are news people, even though we have opinions, and we have to report the whole story if we bring up part of the story. So, yes, he’s upset about Bucks County, but he was right and he won in court. That’s the story,” Hewitt said.

    After a brief pause, Capehart told Hewitt, “I don’t appreciate being lectured about reporting when, Hugh, many times you come here saying lots of things that aren’t based in fact.”

    “I won’t come back, Jonathan, I’m done,” Hewitt said, ripping his earpiece out and standing up.

    “I’m done. This is the most unfair election ad I’ve ever been a part of,” Hewitt continued, his face no longer visible on the screen. “You guys are working, that’s fine, I’m done.”

    Watch:

    The host was eventually forced to end the event early, saying, “Everybody if you’ve been watching … you know these conversations can be interesting, contentious.”

    “You just saw Hugh Hewitt leave which is lamentable, unfortunate. It is what it is. Thank you very much for joining us,” he continued and urged viewers to subscribe to the Post.

    After the incident, Hewitt announced his resignation from the Washington Post.

    “I have in fact quit the Post but I was only writing a column for them every six weeks or so,” Hewitt told Fox News Digital, adding he’d recently offered to write another pro-Trump column for the paper ahead of the election. He informed editorial page editor David Shipley on Friday morning.

    Tulsi Gabbard is SICK of the woke mob. Help Trump defeats Kamala Harris! Will you Donate?

    New Poll Reveals Democrats Are Losing All Hope

    By
    Donny Ferguson
    -
    2

    A new major poll finds most Americans are growing more optimistic about the nation’s future – but Democrats are plunging new depths of despair.

    The Associated Press reports the latest AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research finds “overall, the public has become less pessimistic about the state of politics and the system of choosing leaders. In July 2024, 66% were pessimistic about the state of politics in the country. Now 59% of the public are pessimistic.  Forty percent are pessimistic about how the country’s leaders are chosen, down from 47% last July.”

    “Republicans have grown slightly more optimistic about the future of the Republican Party than they were last summer. In July 2024, 47% said they were optimistic about their party. Now, three months into Donald Trump’s second term, 55% are hopeful about their party’s future,” the AP reports.

    “While half of Republicans are pessimistic about the state of politics in the United States, that is down from 73% last July.  And they have grown slightly more optimistic about the way our leaders are chosen under the country’s political system,” the AP adds.

    But not everyone is happy, with Democrats almost in total despair.

    “In contrast, Democrats have become more pessimistic about their party’s future, the state of the country’s politics, and the country’s process for choosing political leaders. Only 35% of Democrats say they are optimistic about the future of the Democratic Party, down sharply from 57% in the July 2024 poll,” the AP reports.

    “About 7 in 10 Democrats are pessimistic about the state of politics in this country, up from 60% last summer. And 55% of Democrats are pessimistic about the way our leaders are chosen under our political system, up from last summer when Joe Biden was still in the White House,” the AP adds.

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

    White House Pressuring Top News Execs to Bash Impeachment Inquiry

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    2
    White House Principal Deputy Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre holds a press briefing on Friday, July 30, 2021, in the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room of the White House. (Official White House Photo by Erin Scott)

    ANALYSIS – In yet another egregious case of “what if Trump had done this?” and “Biden doesn’t care,” the White House is blatantly pressuring major news media executives to toe the Democrat line on the Biden impeachment process. 

    Just as House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) said Tuesday that he’s directing House committees to open an impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden over his family’s shady overseas business dealings, the White House sent a letter to major news outlets telling them how to cover it.

    Essentially insisting that they should bash it.

    CNN reported that Ian Sams, spokesperson for the ‘impeachment war room’ in the White House Counsel’s Office sent the offending letter to the heads  of news organizations such as The New York Times, Fox News, the Associated Press, CBS News and others.

    “It’s time for the media to ramp up its scrutiny of House Republicans for opening an impeachment inquiry based on lies,” Sams wrote.

    The letter, which said an impeachment inquiry with no supporting evidence should “set off alarm bells for news organizations,” is only the most recent example of how shameless Democrats are about abusing their power and manipulating the media.

    McCarthy on Tuesday said the House Oversight Committee’s investigation found a “culture of corruption” around the Biden family dating back years, especially to Joe Biden’s time as Vice President under Barack Obama.

    “These are allegations of abuse of power, obstruction and corruption, and they warrant further investigation by the House of Representatives,” McCarthy said. “That’s why today I am directing our House committee to open a formal impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden.”

    CNN, apparently already following the White House lead, ‘reported’ on the outrageous letter:

    In its letter Wednesday, the White House asked news organizations to be more clear-eyed in their coverage of the impeachment inquiry, and not to fall prey to the traps of false equivalency in reporting.

    “Covering impeachment as a process story – Republicans say X, but the White House says Y – is a disservice to the American public who relies on the independent press to hold those in power accountable,” Sams wrote.

    “And in the modern media environment, where every day liars and hucksters peddle disinformation and lies everywhere from Facebook to Fox, process stories that fail to unpack the illegitimacy of the claims on which House Republicans are basing all their actions only serve to generate confusion, put false premises in people’s feeds, and obscure the truth,” Sams added.

    McCarthy launched the impeachment inquiry Tuesday without a formal House vote in a bid to appease Republicans on his far-right, including those who have threatened to oust the California Republican from his speakership if he does not move swiftly enough on such an investigation.

    The discredited left-leaning cable network then repeated the false, boilerplate talking point that: “The Republican House-led investigations into Biden have yet to provide any direct evidence that the president financially benefited from Hunter Biden’s career overseas.”

    In doing so, it ignored the mountain of evidence pointing to the likelihood that Joe Biden did benefit financially, and avoided the fact that this is the reason an inquiry is needed to demand the documents that may prove it.

    As Newsmax properly reported:

    “This is not OK,” journalist Matthew Keys tweeted. “The White House should not be encouraging, influencing or interfering in the editorial strategies of America’s newsrooms, including CNN and the New York Times.”

    “Now, any time the media DOES try to hold Republican lawmakers to account, those lawmakers can simply counter by questioning whether it’s actual journalism or something encouraged by the Biden administration,” Keys wrote.

    “All this demonstrates is that the Biden administration has lost confidence in the news media – which I guess mirrors public sentiment over the last few years, too.”

    “The problem is they’re trying to influence coverage. The government should never do that. It is inappropriate,” Keys wrote.

    Of course it is inappropriate. Highly inappropriate. And if Trump’s team had done this during either of his TWO partisan impeachments, all hell would be breaking loose. But Team Biden just doesn’t care.

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

    1...38394041Page 39 of 41
    © Great America News Desk 2022