Random

    Opinion

    Home Opinion Page 39

    Anti-Trump Political Witch Hunt or Valid Criminal Indictments?

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    8
    Gage Skidmore Flickr

    ANALYSIS – Former President Donald Trump faces a slew of legal onslaughts, the latest being a federal indictment by Joe Biden’s Department of Justice (DOJ) for violating the Espionage Act by mishandling classified information.

    Like the FBI raid on his Florida home, this divisive and politically charged indictment is an unprecedented development that makes him the first former president in U.S. history to face criminal charges by the federal government.

    And the political fallout will be huge.

    Trump denies any wrongdoing and is calling the indictments a witch hunt. And yes, he has been unfairly targeted before – many times.

    But is this case really part of that same anti-Trump vendetta? And does it matter?

    The latest indictment is for the willful retention of highly classified national security documents at his Florida Mar-a-Lago estate, corruptly concealing documents, conspiracy to obstruct justice, and making false statements.

    Many will point to the later discovery of classified documents in Joe Biden’s homes and properties connected to him without him facing criminal charges (yet) as proof that this is an anti-Trump witch hunt.

    Last week, the DOJ also cleared former Vice President Mike Pence of any wrongdoing after a small number of classified documents were found at his Indiana home in January.

    Trump posted a slew of angry social media posts against federal investigators Tuesday highlighting different treatment.

    “The Marxists and Fascists in the DOJ & FBI are going after me at a level and speed never seen before in our Country, and I did nothing wrong,” Trump wrote in one of several posts.

    And yes, as I have repeatedly written about, the DOJ and the FBI have been heavily politicized, or even weaponized against conservatives.

    But, as with Richard Nixon and Watergate, the problem for Trump here is the cover-up. Had he simply returned the documents once they were discovered, it would have been far less likely he would have been indicted.

    Instead, Trump repeatedly refused to turn over the materials to federal officials once he left the White House, and then provided a series of bizarre justifications for his actions, before the FBI raided his home.

    A separate special counsel is investigating Biden’s handling of classified material after documents were found at his Wilmington, Del., home and a Washington, D.C., office from his time as vice president. 

    The difference here is Biden’s team alerted federal officials upon discovering the documents and promptly turned them over.

    Trump’s own former Attorney General Bill Barr pushed back on Trump’s claims that a special counsel’s ongoing documents probe is politically motivated. 

    As reported by The Hill:

    “Over time, people will see that this is not a case of the Department of Justice conducting a witch hunt,” Barr said in an interview on CBS on Tuesday. “In fact, they approached this very delicately and with deference to the president, and this would have gone nowhere had the president just returned the documents. But he jerked them around for a year and a half.”

    The indictment carries serious legal consequences, including the possibility of prison if he’s convicted. Trump will appear at a federal courthouse in Miami on June 13.

    In March, the notoriously liberal, Soros-backed Manhattan district attorney, Alvin Bragg, indicted Trump on state charges related to hush-money payments to a former porn film star in 2016. 

    That local indictment appears far more political and ‘Trumped-up’ (pun not intended) than this federal one. The trial for this case begins in March 2024.

    Jack Smith, the special counsel coordinating federal investigations into the Espionage Act indictments, oversees other inquiries related to Trump, including those regarding the Capitol Riot on January 6, 2021.

    But none of this will prevent Trump from continuing his campaign for president. “Nothing stops Trump from running while indicted, or even convicted,” University of California, Los Angeles law professor Richard Hasen told CNN.

    The Constitution requires only three things of candidates. They must be a natural-born citizen (not a naturalized one), at least 35 years old, and residents of the U.S. for at least 14 years.

    So theoretically, Trump could be convicted and still be elected President.

    Not only won’t this keep Trump from running, but it will probably help him with his core base of supporters in the GOP primary.

    And Trump won’t even go to trial for any of this until well into the next presidential term.

    But the optics and politics of all this is the biggest issue.

    As the Daily Caller reported Pence as saying: “I think this is going to be terribly divisive for the country. I also think it sends a terrible message to the wider world that looks at America as a standard of not only democracy, but of justice.”

    The question is when does all of this come to a head? And what will happen when it does?

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

    Joe Biden (aka JRB Ware’) Facing ‘Inferno of Allegations’ – What’s Next?

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    3
    Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    ANALYSIS – If you only followed establishment news, you would think that only former president Donald Trump is in a heap of legal trouble. Well, regardless of whether Trump’s legal woes are justified or a witch hunt by a weaponized Department of Justice (DoJ) and politicized local prosecutors, he isn’t the only president in increasingly hot water.

    Whether it’s through his son Hunter, or by his own doing, Joe Biden is also facing what one congressman called an “inferno of allegations.”

    Pennsylvania Republican and House Oversight Committee member Scott Perry said on a Newsmax TV interview on Thursday that where there’s smoke there’s fire, and Joe Biden has “gotten himself into an inferno of allegations and credible claims of influence peddling that seems like it’s filled with probable cause.”

    Newsmax reported:

    Perry made the comments on “Rob Schmitt Tonight” in a discussion about the president’s use of at least one email alias when he was vice president. The Oversight Committee has demanded that the National Archives turn over unredacted material related to the alias and its use that overlaps with Hunter Biden’s time in Ukraine.

    “I think it’s really long past time where the Oversight Committee and the Congress itself to play hardball with these agencies that somehow think that this information that belongs to the American people somehow solely belongs to them as though it’s their personal possession,” Perry told Schmitt.

    Joe Biden’s use of email aliases during his time as vice president is the latest bombshell to come from investigations into Hunter’s shady foreign business deals.

    As the New York Post reported:

    President Biden used at least three pseudonyms during his vice presidency to send messages to his son Hunter concerning both family and official government business — including meetings with Ukrainian leaders, emails found on the first son’s abandoned laptop show.

    Then-Vice President Biden emailed Hunter under the aliases “Robin Ware,” “Robert L. Peters” and “JRB Ware” between 2014 and 2016, keeping his son abreast of scheduled talks with then-Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko and Kyiv Prime Minister Volodymyr Groysman, among other communications The Post first revealed in 2021.

    The elder Biden had one of his aides, John Flynn, send his daily schedule to the private email address “[email protected]” at least 10 times between May 18 and June 15, 2016, copying Hunter on a May 26 message with a note about an “8.45am prep for 9am phonecall [sic]

    Biden had pressured Poroshenko five months earlier to fire Ukrainian prosecutor general Viktor Shokin, who was investigating the natural gas company Burisma Holdings, where Hunter earned roughly $1 million per year while serving on the board between 2014 and 2019.

    Joe Biden also used the “JRB Ware” alias in 2016 to discuss plans for the Penn Biden Centerin Washington, DC, and where improperly kept classified material was found late last year.

    The revelation of these Biden aliases has prompted House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) to ask the National Archives to turn over unredacted records where Biden relied on the aliases when communicating with his son Hunter and his son’s business partners Eric Schwerin and Devon Archer.

    Archer told the committee on July 31 that Joe Biden got on phone calls with his son’s foreign business associates nearly two dozen times.

    Schwerin also visited the Old Executive Office Building to meet with then-Vice President Biden around the time the Obama-Biden administration was making big changes to US-Ukraine policy.

    So, what should happen next? Well, Congressman Perry has an answer for that.

    Newsmax quoted Perry as saying:

    I think the subpoenas have to start. I think the impeachment inquiry is overdue again. We have probable cause. I think in any other criminal case instance right now that this would be completely fulfilling the probable cause requirement.

    I think it’s our duty to ferret this out, so the American people know about their president, whether they can trust him or not.

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

    Is One of America’s Most Powerful Liberal Groups Illicitly Lobbying for this Foreign Billionaire?

    By
    Donny Ferguson
    -
    2
    Image via Pixabay free images

    Members of Congress want to know if one of America’s most powerful liberal political groups is evading federal laws requiring them to report lobbying on behalf of foreign billionaires.

    U.S. House Committee on Natural Resources Chairman Bruce Westerman (R-AR) and Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chairman Paul Gosar (R-AZ) want League of Conservation Voters President Gene Karpinski to answer questions about LCV’s fundraising, lobbying, and political activities, and whether it is complying with the Foreign Agents Registration Act.

    The League of Conservation Voters, a radical environmentalist group, is one of the nation’s most powerful political organizations.

    OpenSecrets reports the LCV donated $15,129,989 to federal political candidates in 2020.  They also spent $42,272,125 on ads supporting or opposing federal candidates in 2020, making them the nation’s 15th-biggest political spending.

    But members of Congress want to know if the LCV is lobbying lawmakers at the behest of Swiss billionaire Hansjörg Wyss, a radical leftist who opposes American energy independence.

    The members write:

    “Following ‘intense lobbying’ from LCV and related groups that led to passage of the [Inflation Reduction Act,] you met then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi who told you Democrats ‘passed what you wanted’ and asked whether LCV would ‘have our backs’ in the 2022 election. Following the election, in an end-of-year memo on December 19, 2022, LCV detailed how the ‘LCV Victory Fund and affiliated entities invested more than $100 million’ to elect Democrat candidates that align with LCV’s eco-agenda agenda in the 2022 elections. Previously, in the 2018 cycle, LCV spent $80 million on candidates that support its eco-agenda.  

    “LCV has registered to lobby on several activities within the jurisdiction of the Committee, including issues like opposing offshore drilling plans, supporting a ‘pause and review of the federal oil and gas program,’ and supporting the restoration and expansion of a number of national monuments. The Committee is concerned that LCV’s relationship with foreign donors, such as Swiss national Mr. Wyss, who are prohibited from contributing, either directly or indirectly, to domestic political campaigns may impact LCV’s political and lobbying activities relating to America’s ability to achieve energy independence. As you are aware, such political and lobbying activities may require compliance with the Foreign Agents Registration Act.   

    “The central purpose of FARA is to ‘promote transparency with respect to foreign influence within the United States by ensuring that the United States government and the public know the source of certain information from foreign agents intended to influence American public opinion, policy, and laws.’ Hence, FARA requires any person or entity, including non-profits, to register with the Department of Justice (DOJ) if they act as an agent or at the request ‘of a foreign principal or of a person any of whose activities are directly or indirectly, supervised, directed, controlled, financed, or subsidized in whole or in major part by a foreign principal.’ Registration under FARA is also required for any entity that attempts, on behalf of a foreign principal, to influence any section of the U.S. public or a U.S. government official in ‘formulating, adopting, or changing the domestic or foreign policies of the United States.'”

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

    General Milley Stoops To Trump Lows With ‘Wannabe Dictator’ Jab

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    3
    Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III, Army Gen. Mark A. Milley, chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff; and Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) Michael J. McCord provide testimony at a Senate Armed Services Committee budget hearing, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C., March 28, 2023. (DoD photo by Chad J. McNeeley)

    ANALYSIS – General Milley’s comments were beneath him, even if Trump provoked him. As I wrote about earlier, former President Donald Trump made typically inappropriate remarks when he implied outgoing Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley, due to his back-channel calls to China’s top general, deserved the ‘DEATH’ penalty for treason (all caps were in Trump’s post on Truth Social).

    While no one should take Trump’s bombastic social media posts too seriously, I did say Trump was wrong to add fuel to an already flammable political environment in our country with his comments. I have also criticized Milley for his many overreactions to Trump’s words and deeds during his time in office.

    In doing so, Milley made Trump out to be something he wasn’t, placed himself smack in the middle of the Democrat Party narrative of Trump, and undermined the commander-in-chief and the presidency.

    In my view Milley has also been at the very least deliberately and willfully ignorant of the extreme woke policies the Pentagon has been pushing. Still, despite all my jabs at Milley, I respected his decades of service to the uniform and our country.

    It’s a shame then, that Milley chose to take the low road on his way out of the DC swamp, demeaning himself and the institution, while himself politicizing the military against Trump.

    As the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board wrote:

    Gen. Milley retired this week after four years as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. “We are unique among the world’s militaries,” the top military officer said at a retirement ceremony on Friday, noting that service members swear an oath to the Constitution.

    “We don’t take an oath to a country. We don’t take an oath to a tribe. We don’t take an oath to a religion. We don’t take an oath to a king, or a queen, or a tyrant or a dictator. And we don’t take an oath to a wannabe dictator.”

    Readers will catch the parting shot at Mr. Trump. The media certainly did. And who could blame Gen. Milley for loathing Mr. Trump? Casually floating the idea of harming a U.S. military officer is conduct unworthy of a wannabe Commander in Chief.

    Yet it was still dispiriting to hear Gen. Milley’s remarks about a former President, in public, while wearing the uniform of the U.S. Army. Mr. Trump is the front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination. Like it or not, he commands political support in the country. That doubtless includes a large chunk of the enlisted ranks of the United States military services. The end-of-tour catharsis of a swipe at Mr. Trump isn’t worth polarizing the force over politics.

    I agree wholeheartedly with the Journal. Milley knows better, and with his bitter and snarky jabs at Trump chose to take the low road rather than the high road on his way out. 

    Despite my great misgivings about the truly woke new Joint Chiefs Chairman, Air Force General C.Q. Brown, I also concur with the Journal’s parting words: “We hope that turning down the temperature of politics in the U.S. armed forces is a priority for the new chairman—perhaps behind only the military threat posed by the Chinese Communist Party.”

    Message to Brown: We need an apolitical military leadership no matter the provocations from any political leader. That also means being non-ideological and non-woke. 

    It’s a shame Milley couldn’t see that while he was chairman, and also couldn’t just leave gracefully.

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

    MAGA Congressman Stuns With New Bill to Defund Trump’s Soros-backed Prosecutor

    By
    Donny Ferguson
    -
    0
    Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America, CC BY-SA 2.0 via Wikimedia Commons

    With former President Donald Trump now indicted and facing prosecution from an activist liberal prosecutor, while criminals roam free in his city, one member of Congress is taking action to stop the use of federal funds to prosecute political opponents while ignoring violent crime.

    Congressman Andy Biggs (R-AZ) introduced two bills to strip federal taxpayer funding from Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg and other “reform” prosecutors elected with the backing of liberal billionaire George Soros. 

    Biggs’ “Accountability for Lawless Violence In Our Neighborhoods Act” or “ALVIN Act “prohibits federal funds from being awarded to the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office and requires Bragg to repay federal funds granted after January 1, 2022.  

    Biggs has also introduced the “No Federal Funds for Political Prosecutions Act,” which prohibits state or local law enforcement agencies from using funds or property seized through asset forfeiture, to investigate or prosecute the President, Vice President, or a candidate for the office of President in a criminal case.

    “District Attorney Alvin Bragg ran on a campaign pledge to indict President Trump. Bragg took the unprecedented action of converting alleged minor business misdemeanors to 34 individual felonies in an attempt to put President Trump behind bars and humiliate him and his supporters,” said Biggs. 

    “This weaponized prosecutor’s office has spent thousands of federal taxpayer dollars to subsidize this political indictment and is demanding millions more in federal grants,” said Biggs.

    “It’s disturbing to see District Attorney Bragg waste federal resources for political purposes rather than addressing the serious crime in his city,” Biggs added.

    “As a member of the House Judiciary and Oversight & Accountability Committees, and with an almost insurmountable national debt that exceeds $31 trillion, the nation simply cannot afford to support Mr. Bragg’s politicization of the criminal justice system,”

    Cosponsors of the Accountability for Lawless Violence In Our Neighborhoods Act or the ALVIN Act include: Rep. Mary Miller (R-IL), Rep. Eli Crane (R-AZ), Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ), Rep. Ralph Norman (R-SC), and Rep. Bob Good (R-VA).

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

    Many in Gen Z ‘Love Big Brother,’ Want State Surveillance in Homes

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    3
    Image via Pixabay free images.

    ANALYSIS – Be afraid, Be very afraid. 1984 is almost here. A recent poll by the Libertarian CATO Institute showed that a big chunk of our latest and brightest Generation Z (Gen Z or Zoomers) actually favors having the government watch them 24/7.

    Including surveillance in their homes and bedrooms.

    Zoomers are officially those under the age of 26. And come right after Millennials.

    After the horrors of World War Two showcased the brutal dangers of modern totalitarian dictatorships such as Nazi Germany and Communist Soviet Union, George Orwell penned his classic dystopian tale titled ‘Nineteen Eighty-Four’ (1984).

    In the novel, written in 1949, the pervasive government of the fictional nation Oceania was known as ‘Big Brother,’ and it watched its citizens incessantly via two-way video devices called ‘telescreens.’ 

    This was of course before the advent of television or modern surveillance.

    Government agents known as the ‘Thought Police’ were able to monitor everyone at home, at work, on public streets, in shops, even in bathrooms. It was a terrifying existence.

    The book and term ‘Big Brother’ have since been widely referenced when warning about government overreach and expanding state control. 

    Sadly, it seems that almost 30 percent of Gen Z (and some Millennials) haven’t read the book or understand the danger.

    CATO’s Blog notes that: 

    In a newly released Cato Institute 2023 Central Bank Digital Currency National Survey of 2,000 Americans, we asked respondents whether they “favor or oppose the government installing surveillance cameras in every household to reduce domestic violence, abuse, and other illegal activity.”

    Fortunately, the poll shows that 75 percent of Americans oppose or are strongly opposed to this insane idea.

    However, CATO also notes that the younger you get, the less concerned Americans are about state surveillance and control:

    …Americans under the age of 30 stand out when it comes to 1984‐style in‐home government surveillance cameras. 3 in 10 (29 percent) Americans under 30 favor “the government installing surveillance cameras in every household” in order to “reduce domestic violence, abuse, and other illegal activity.” Support declines with age, dropping to 20 percent among 30–44-year-olds and dropping considerably to 6 percent among those over the age of 45.

    Support for 24/7 surveillance was especially high among those younger than 30. Almost a third of those born after 1993 said they would welcome round-the-clock monitoring by the government. 

    Those respondents in their 40s, 50s, and 60s were almost totally opposed. That is a terribly disturbing trend that bodes ill for liberty in America in the next decades.

    In his Boston Globe Email Newsletter, Jeff Jacoby provides his explanation for this sad state among Zoomers:

    …perhaps, [it] is that Generation Z has been indoctrinated to regard safety, not freedom, as the highest good — so much so that many would rather be under the nonstop watch of the state than face the possibility of being abused or endangered.”

    If so, they are in for a fearful awakening. What little protection they might gain from being under the authorities’ constant watch is nothing compared with the peril they would face. Benjamin Franklin’s famous admonition is as relevant as ever: “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” Inviting Big Brother into your home will not keep Gen Z-ers safe. And by the time they realize what they have given up, it will be too late to get it back.

    Jacoby adds that the protagonist of Orwell’s novel, Winston Smith, is a weak man who resents the regime — and is ultimately broken for it. And the must-read book’s final words are haunting: “He loved Big Brother.”

    Yet, after all we have seen and know about tyranny, almost a third of Generation Z is still prepared to love Big Brother too. Yes, we must be afraid. Very afraid.

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

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

    By
    Donny Ferguson
    -
    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.”

    CIA Sued Over Role In Hunter Biden Laptop Election Cover-Up

    By
    Donny Ferguson
    -
    3
    The New Headquarters Building (NHB) of the CIA. The Central Intelligence Agency, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

    A nonprofit legal watchdog has filed a federal lawsuit against the Central Intelligence Agency, seeking documents and records over an election-year government effort to cover up reporting seen as damaging to Joe Biden’s presidential campaign.

    In particular, the group seeks information on the agency’s role in a letter signed by 51 intelligence officials that falsely claimed the Russian government “planted” evidence of criminal activity on a laptop owned by Biden’s middle-aged son Hunter.

    Judicial Watch filed the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the CIA for all “communications of the spy agency’s Prepublication Classification Review Board (PCRB) regarding an October 19, 2020, email request to review and ‘clear’ a letter signed by 51 former intelligence community officials characterizing the Hunter Biden laptop story as having ‘all the earmarks of a Russian disinformation campaign,’” the group announced.

    “The Deep State CIA, it seems, engaged in election interference and a political operation against the American people to help Joe Biden and hurt Trump,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “And now the CIA is ignoring FOIA law to cover up its role in the scandal, censoring and suppressing the Hunter Biden/Joe Biden laptop story just before the presidential election.”

    In October 2020, the New York Post broke a bombshell story revealing that Hunter Biden’s laptop, which he abandoned at a Delaware computer shop, contained photographs of Hunter Biden engaged in drug use and using prostitutes, as well as emails describing what appear to be shady foreign business deals.

    Fearing the story could damage Biden’s presidential campaign, social media companies attempted to suppress the sharing of the Post’s reporting.

    The Biden campaign also reached out to intelligence officials, including the CIA and FBI, seeking their help in falsely discrediting the story.

    “In a May 10, 2023, report the House Judiciary Committee revealed that on October 19, 2020, three days before the second presidential debate between President Donald Trump and Democrat candidate Joe Biden, then-Acting CIA Director Michael Morell sent the PCRB the finalized letter for review, calling it a ‘rush job,’ and quickly secured its approval,” Judicial Watch reports.

    Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit after the CIA failed to respond to a May 11, 2023, FOIA request for:

    Records and communications of the Prepublication Classification Review Board, Central Intelligence Agency, including emails, email chains, email attachments, text messages, cables, voice recordings, correspondence, statements, letters, memoranda, reports, presentations, notes, or other form of record, regarding an October 19, 2020, email request to review and “clear” a letter involving the Hunter Biden laptop story potentially having Russian involvement or being a Russian disinformation plot.

    An investigation by the House Judiciary Committee and House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence found that the CIA, or a CIA employee, may have helped the Biden campaign find signers for the false letter.

    One former CIA employee, David Cariens, reveals that while speaking with the PCRB in October 2020 to review materials for his memoir, a CIA employee “asked” him to sign the false letter.

    “When the person in charge of reviewing the book called to say it was approved with no changes, I was told about the draft letter,” said Cariens.

    “The person asked me if I would be willing to sign. . . . After hearing the letter’s contents, and the qualifiers in it such as, “We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails provided to the New York Post by President Trump’s personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement . . .’ I agreed to sign,” Cariens said.

    “If accurate, this information raises fundamental concerns about the role of the CIA in helping to falsely discredit allegations about the Biden family in the weeks before the 2020 presidential election,” Judicial Watch notes.

    Another former CIA officer, Marc Polymeropoulos, criticized the CIA’s involvement in his testimony to the House Judiciary Committee in the following exchange:

    Q. Does what [Former CIA official David Cariens] described there, that interaction with the [Prepublication Classification Review Board], sound like a quid pro quo to you?

    A. I can’t comment on this. This is—to me, this is something that the [Prepublication Classification Review Board] in my experience would never engage in something like that. They are just straightforward back and forth in terms of approval. The idea they would have a comment on any other thing that they were working on, that to me is not even close to what I’ve experienced with them.

    Q. Does that concern you?

    A. If it’s true, it would concern me, for sure. But I just—I have a hard time believing that occurred. If it did, that’s incredibly unprofessional.

    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.

    READ NEXT: Longtime ACU/CPAC Leader David Keene Speaks Out After Vice Chair’s Resignation

    Credible US Officials Testify to Congress About Real UFO Threat

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    1

    ANALYSIS – Decades after the infamous Roswell incident captivated Americans, the House of Representatives has convened a landmark panel on Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAPs), also known as Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs).

    In what would have been unimaginable just a few years ago, the hearing is the most serious acknowledgment yet that the mysterious sightings require scrutiny at the highest levels of government.

    The debate about UAP has become a hot topic in recent years following multiple leaked photographs and video recordings from the U.S. Navy showing UAP craft operating at high speed over American airspace, often with no visible propulsion and maneuvering in ways that baffle aeronautics experts.

    A leaked navy video, captured in July 2019, for example, shows a sphere-shaped unidentified object flying over water near San Diego before apparently disappearing into the ocean.

    At the hearing, three witnesses testified under oath about their experiences with UFOs. Significantly, former military and intelligence officials testified to the panel Wednesday that they have seen UFOs and said they could pose risks to national security. 

    All three witnesses said the UAP may be probing for weakness in the U.S. military system.

    The highly credible former officials called for the U.S. government to share what it knows about the phenomena.

    But the Pentagon’s UAP task force, the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office, says it hasn’t been able to substantiate claims that any federal programs have possessed or reverse-engineered extraterrestrial materials.

    Still, during two hours of testimony on July 26, three witnesses shared their encounters with flying objects that they say defy explanation:

    1) David Grusch, an ex-Air Force intelligence officer, claims the U.S. has been running a secret program to retrieve and reverse engineer UAPs for decades, and has been aware of “non-human” activity since the 1930s.

    Grusch said he believes the U.S. government is in possession of UAP based on interviewing 40 witnesses over four years with direct knowledge of the program. 

    Perhaps more sensationally, in response to a question regarding aliens, he replied “biologics [life forms] came with some of these [UAP] recoveries.”

    2) Ryan Graves, a former navy fighter pilot, testified his squadron repeatedly encountered mysterious flying objects which could remain stationary despite hurricane-level winds – claiming he saw them off the Atlantic coast “every day for at least a couple years.”

    The Wall Street Journal reported on one sighting:

    Graves said his aircrew saw UAP during a training exercise off the coast of Virginia Beach, Va. Two jets encountered “a dark gray or black cube inside of a clear sphere” and the object came within 50 feet of the lead aircraft, he said. It was estimated to be 5 to 15 feet in diameter, he said.

    3) Retired U.S. Navy commander David Fravor recounted a 2004 encounter with a “Tic Tac” shaped UAP that moved in a way that baffled aviators. Fravor said it had no visible rotors or wings. 

    It was “moving very abruptly over the white water, like a ping-pong ball,” he added, noting that he flew his aircraft closer to get a better view of the UAP, but “it rapidly accelerated and disappeared.”

    But this is only the latest and most significant public inquiry into the UFO threat.

    In 2021 the U.S. intelligence agencies were called to deliver a report on Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP) to Congress.

    The first unclassified report from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) made public what the Pentagon reportedly knows about UAP, renewing interest in the mysterious objects which have grown into a modern myth in American society.

    ODNI produced a second UAP report in 2022.

    Whether UAP is the result of advanced foreign technology or from a more otherworldly source, government officials are now demanding to know more about them. And so is the public.

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

    Amanda Head: Debunking Leftists’ Lies About Thanksgiving

    By
    Amanda Head
    -
    3

    Every year as families and friends gather to give Thanks a coalition of left-wing woke harpies descend on the holiday to remind you to make sure to politicize every aspect of your life. In recent years liberals have targeted the controversial story of Thanksgiving as a way to attack White colonizers and sing a song of sympathy for Native Americans.

    Watch Amanda de-dunk the biggest lies peddled by the left about Thanksgiving.

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

    1...383940Page 39 of 40
    © Great America News Desk 2022