Random

    Opinion

    Home Opinion Page 39

    Biden Admin. Blasted for Attending Event with Wanted Terrorist Who Killed US Soldiers

    By
    Donny Ferguson
    -
    4
    President Joe Biden delivers remarks in National Statuary Hall on the one-year anniversary of the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, Thursday, January 6, 2022, in Washington, D.C. (Official White House Photo by Cameron Smith)

    Outraged members of Congress are demanding an explanation as to why senior Biden administration officials attended an event featuring a notorious and active Islamic terrorist who has killed dozens of American soldiers.

    U.S. Representatives Doug Lamborn (R-CO), Jim Banks (R-IN), Carlos Gimenez (R-FL), Ronny Jackson (R-TX), and Robert Wittman (R-VA), are demanding the Biden State Department explain why senior U.S. officials attended a forum alongside Qais Hadi Sayed Hasan al-Khazali, designated by the State Department as an active Islamic terrorist currently under U.S. government sanctions.

    “I am gravely concerned about the precedent this activity sets,” said Lamborn. “I insist the State Department take immediate action to ensure that its officials do not give credibility to events that feature enemies of the United States.”

    “Qais Hadi Sayed Hasan al-Khazali, the terrorist prominently featured at this event attended by high-ranking U.S. Department of State officials, has served in various terrorist organizations since at least 2003 and is responsible for the death of dozens of American soldiers. He is known to have directed and coordinated the attack on American forces in Karbala on January 20, 2007, that resulted in five American soldiers dead and three wounded,” a statement from Lamborn’s office reveals.

    “Qais al-Khazali is also responsible for the attack on the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad on December 31, 2019. For these actions, among others, Qais al-Khazali was sanctioned by the U.S. Treasury Department on December 6, 2019, for ‘involvement in serious human rights abuse in Iraq’ and designated as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist on January 3, 2020,” the statement adds.

    Despite appearing at the same forum as Biden officials, Qais al-Khazali is still an active and designated terrorist and has been sanctioned by the U.S. Treasury Department.

    “Currently, Qais al-Khazali is Secretary-General of Asa’id Ahl al-Haw (AAH), also known as the Khazali Network, a radical Iraqi Shi’a political party and paramilitary group that is funded, trained, and equipped by Iran’s Quds Force and Hezbollah. The AAH claimed responsibility for over 6,000 attacks on U.S.-led coalition forces between 2006 and 2011, including the roadside bomb that killed the last American soldier to die before the U.S. withdrawal in November 2011. This group was labeled a foreign terrorist organization (FTO) on January 3, 2020,” the statement concludes.

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

    Ex-Capitol Police Chief: J6 Riot Not False Flag, But Allowed to Happen

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    4
    Elvert Barnes, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

    ANALYSIS – From the beginning, conspiracies surrounded the Capitol Riot on January 6, 2021. Stunned conservatives couldn’t believe Republicans caused that mayhem. Some called it a deliberate false flag operation by the feds to entrap innocent Trump supporters and launch a massive witch hunt. 

    Both last two things did occur.

    Meanwhile, the Democrats and media called the afternoon event an attempted coup and later more steadily ‘the insurrection.’

    It was neither. But it also wasn’t a well-orchestrated false flag operation. The truth is just as bad but less planned.

    I was at the Capitol on Jan 6 as a security contractor for a foreign TV news crew, and I condemned the violence the next day. I wrote that the, at times, violent riot wasn’t a coup, or an insurrection but the violence was criminal behavior, and should be punished.

    I also noted that the rioters all appeared to be passionate Trump supporters, and not likely a false flag operation by the feds, or ANTIFA infiltrators.

    Since then, I have defended many of the peaceful protesters unfairly caught up in the FBI dragnet and harshly charged for minor nonviolent crimes. 

    I have also written about the large number of undercover police and federal agents and their informants since identified at the Capitol that day. And I have noted how the Democrats in charge of the House and Senate that day refused National Guard support, as did the Democrat mayor of DC.

    At least until it was too late.

    Now, former Capitol Hill Police Chief Steven Sund has added his insight into the events. And he claims that it seems as if they wanted something to happen.

    Sund resigned from his post shortly after the riots. He had been chief of the Capitol Police since 2019 and had served as a police officer for more than 30 years in total.

    Newsmax reported on his untelevised interview with Tucker Carlson taped before Carlson was fired from Fox News:

    “Everything appears to be a cover-up,” Sund told Carlson. “I’m not a conspiracy theorist … but when you look at the information and intelligence they had, the military had, it’s all watered down. I’m not getting intelligence, I’m denied any support from National Guard in advance. I’m denied National Guard while we’re under attack, for 71 minutes …”

    … “Could there possibly be actually … they kind of wanted something to happen? It’s not a far stretch to begin to think that. It’s sad when you start putting everything together and thinking about the way this played out … what was their end goal?”

    Sund told Carlson he believes that Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley and then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., had intelligence of what was coming on Jan. 6 but failed to communicate it and subsequently covered it up.

    “If I was allowed to do my job as the chief we wouldn’t be here; this didn’t have to happen,” he said.

    Carlson also said on Russel Brand’s podcast that Sund told him:  ‘Oh yeah, that crowd was filled with federal agents.’

    This all fits neatly with much of what I have noted previously. But while I blamed Democrat leaders for holding back needed support to defend the Capitol for other political reasons, Sund seems to believe they held it back because they started hoping for a big chaotic show they could then turn into a political circus.

    And the chaos ensued, and so did their circus.

    Sadly, Donald Trump and some of his supporters fell for the trap.

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

    GOP Leaders Fund Anti-Freedom Caucus Primary Candidates

    By
    Alex Muse
    -
    2
    Ted Eytan from Washington, DC, USA, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

    In the quiet corridors of Republican power, something unprecedented is happening. For decades, party leadership maintained a mostly unspoken, but deeply respected ethic: do not intervene in open-seat primaries, especially in safely Republican districts. Let the voters decide. Let the grassroots rise. Let the contest unfold without the heavy thumb of Washington tipping the scale. This was not merely tradition. It was a matter of trust, a recognition that voters, not donors, not operatives, not Majority Whips, should choose the next Republican standard-bearer. Today, that ethic is being cast aside.

    The stage is Arizona’s 5th Congressional District, a deep-red seat held by House Freedom Caucus (HFC) stalwart Andy Biggs, who is stepping down to pursue the governorship. Historically, this would be the moment for conservative insurgents to rise, for HFC allies to present their case to voters without interference from party brass. Instead, what we are witnessing is an unmistakable effort by House Republican leadership to erase one of the Freedom Caucus’s most reliable seats.

    Three separate leadership PACs have now contributed directly to Jay Feely, a former NFL kicker and establishment-favored Republican who is not aligned with the Freedom Caucus. Majority Whip Tom Emmer’s “Electing Majority Making Effective Republicans” PAC gave $5,000. NRCC Chair Richard Hudson’s “First in Freedom PAC” gave $2,500. And Rep. Juan Ciscomani, of neighboring AZ-6, added $1,000 from his own “Defending the American Dream PAC.” These are not idle contributions. They are targeted, strategic, and meant to shape the outcome of a race that should have been left to the people.

    Only one candidate in the race, Daniel Keenan, a local home builder, has pledged to join the Freedom Caucus. His candidacy represents continuity with Biggs’s conservative legacy. Feely’s candidacy, by contrast, is backed by leadership precisely because it promises rupture. That is the point. The goal here is not merely to elect a Republican, but to deny the seat to the Freedom Caucus entirely.

    To grasp the seriousness of this act, one must understand just how rare it is. Leadership PACs, particularly those operated by high-ranking figures like the Majority Whip and NRCC Chair, have historically stayed neutral in Republican primaries unless protecting incumbents. This was not a legal requirement, but a moral one. Rick Scott, as NRSC chair, was emphatic on this point during his tenure: “We should remain neutral in primaries, except in the cases of GOP incumbents. The voters will decide.”

    In fact, neutrality in safe-seat primaries was such a bedrock value that during the contentious 2023 Speaker’s race, conservative holdouts demanded that Kevin McCarthy enshrine it in writing. The Congressional Leadership Fund (CLF), the House GOP’s main super PAC aligned with McCarthy, publicly promised not to interfere in open safe Republican primaries. CLF president Dan Conston declared, “CLF will not spend in any open-seat primaries in safe Republican districts, and CLF will not grant resources to other super PACs to do so.” That promise secured enough support for McCarthy to win the gavel. It was a recognition that such meddling would constitute a betrayal.

    And yet, here we are, watching as Emmer, Hudson, and Ciscomani appear to do precisely what CLF promised not to do. They are not spending millions, but the act is significant because of who they are and what it signals. A whisper from the Majority Whip carries weight. A nod from the NRCC chair is not an idle gesture. Their PAC money announces a clear intention: the Republican Party must no longer accommodate the Freedom Caucus.

    To call this behavior unethical is not hyperbole. The entire point of leadership PACs is to strengthen the party against Democrats, not to wage civil war within it. Donors to these PACs do not expect their money to be used to sandbag fellow Republicans who happen to believe in a stricter reading of the Constitution, in tighter budgets, in actually following the rules. They expect their money to be used to expand the majority, not to hollow it out ideologically.

    This is why even modest interventions like these cause such a stir. They are not just financial acts, but symbolic declarations. They say to the conservative base, “You are not welcome here.” They say to the House Freedom Caucus, “You will be replaced.” They signal that what was once an uneasy coalition is now an open conflict.

    There is precedent, to be sure, but not encouraging one. In 2016, Freedom Caucus member Rep. Tim Huelskamp was defeated in his Kansas primary after outside money flooded the race. It was widely seen as retaliation for his opposition to then-Speaker John Boehner. The establishment, furious at Huelskamp’s independence, funded a challenger, Roger Marshall, who went on to win. At the time, that maneuver was shocking. Paul Gosar, another HFC member, remarked, “The Freedom Caucus hasn’t challenged sitting members. We’ve only played in open seats. But isn’t it interesting that K Street and Wall Street are playing against our members?”

    Now, that behavior is becoming institutional. The NRCC chair and the Majority Whip are no longer merely allowing such intervention, they are directing it. The shift is profound. It marks a move from tolerating intra-party dissent to crushing it.

    What changed? The rise of the Freedom Caucus has been a source of anxiety for establishment Republicans ever since its inception. But with the return of Donald Trump to the presidency in 2025 and the growing alignment between the Freedom Caucus and the MAGA base, that anxiety has morphed into fear. The Freedom Caucus has shown it can shape leadership elections, influence appropriations bills, and demand accountability. It is no longer a fringe. It is a force. And that makes it a target.

    Trump himself has called Tom Emmer a “RINO” and opposed his speakership bid. Hudson and Ciscomani have similarly earned the ire of MAGA-aligned voters for their votes on spending bills and procedural maneuvers seen as too accommodating to Democrats. The leadership PAC donations in Arizona’s 5th are not just about that race. They are part of a larger strategy to neutralize the most vocal advocates of the America First agenda.

    None of this is illegal. But neither is it wise. When party leadership abandons neutrality, it sends a message to grassroots conservatives: your vote does not count unless we approve of your candidate. That message corrodes trust. It demoralizes volunteers. It severs the organic connection between representative and represented. It replaces the republican with the oligarchic.

    The party should not fear its conservative wing. It should listen to it. If leadership believes Freedom Caucus members are too extreme, they should make that argument on the merits, in public, and with courage. They should not attempt to buy the outcome behind closed doors with PAC money. That is not persuasion. That is manipulation.

    What is unfolding in Arizona’s 5th is not just a local race. It is a test case. If leadership succeeds in deleting a Freedom Caucus seat here, others will follow. More PAC money will flow. More loyal conservatives will be boxed out before the voters even speak. The House Freedom Caucus will be diminished, not by debate or democracy, but by design.

    This is not the path to unity. It is the road to irrelevance. The Republican Party must decide whether it wishes to be a big tent or a closed club. If the answer is the latter, it should at least have the honesty to admit it.

    If you enjoy my work, please consider subscribing https://x.com/amuse.

    Sponsored by the John Milton Freedom Foundation, a nonprofit dedicated to helping independent journalists overcome formidable challenges in today’s media landscape and bring crucial stories to you.

    DOUBLE Your Impact to Crush the Left’s Comeback! It’s up to patriots like you to stop them. Heritage will match every dollar — up to $1 MILLION. Double your impact before it’s too late!

    .

    NYT, Scientists and Journalists’ Failed Miserably on C*VID Lab Leak Story: National Security Experts

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    1
    Haxorjoe, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

    ANALYSIS – Thankfully the pressure continues to build on the establishment media and scientific community for its massive failure and cover-up of the C*VID-19 lab leak origin theory. 

    From day one of the C*VID outbreak in Wuhan, China, I argued that it would be dereliction of duty for any intelligence analyst worth his/her salt, or any journalist or expert, to ignore the elephant in the room – that there was a rare Chinese government Level 4 Biosafety Lab (BSL-4) within a few miles of the alleged ground zero for the virus.

    Compounding this fact with the understanding that China has a robust bioweapons research effort, and shoddy safety protocols at the relatively new lab in Wuhan, it should have been a no-brainer, everyone should have been all over this scenario.

    But sure enough, for partisan, ideological, and just plain stupid, reasons the establishment mob quickly dismissed that possibility outright, calling it a conspiracy theory and even worse, racist. 

    Many of these players wanted to stay on the good side of China, some had vested interests in keeping a lid on it, others instinctively rebuked anything President Trump proposed, and others simply wanted to obsessively focus on how Trump was allegedly failing on COVID rather than on where this deadly virus originated.

    Meanwhile, Big Tech social media platforms openly censored any views, including mine on LinkedIn, that simply reported on and explored the facts and available intelligence on the Wuhan lab and its potential relation to C*VID.

    Over time however, this subpar reporting, and the massive effort bordering on a conspiracy to suppress the truth on C*VID’s origins, began to crumble.

    The June 9 World Health Organization Scientific Advisory Group for the Origins of Novel Pathogens report, and various other serious investigations, concluded that deliberate human involvement, or at least human error, may ultimately have been at the root of the pandemic that has killed over 15 million people worldwide.

    In December, reports The Blaze, Republicans on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence also concluded in their interim report that it was “plausible” that Ch*nese military researchers possessed the C*VID-19 virus “as part of bioweapons research” prior to its release into the world as a consequence of a safety incident at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

    Many of the obtuse big media outlets, colluding with Big Tech, and the misguided science experts have begun to retract and recant. Some even quietly admitting they may have been wrong on the lab leak origin theory.

    But that isn’t enough. Far from it.

    As reported by The Blaze:

    A group of national security experts published a letter this week denouncing those in the mainstream media who downplayed, ignored, or outright denied the possibility that the C*VID-19 virus originated in a Chinese c*mmunist l*b in Wuhan.

    The January 11 letter addressed to the editors of the Lancet, Nature Medicine, the New York Times, and Time magazine, was signed by forty-three national security experts, including House Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Michael McCaul (R-Texas), former Defense Intelligence Agency acting Director David Shedd, former national security adviser Robert O’Brien, and numerous former State Department and National Security Council officials. 

    The Blaze continues:

    The letter implicates news outlets like the New York Times and scientific journals such as the Lancet in an apparent campaign to censor or displace dissenting voices around the pandemic’s origins.

    Not only was journalists’ and editors’ failure to entertain the possibility that the W*han Institute of Vir*logy — controlled by the genocidal Chinese regime and notorious for performing gain-of-function experiments on coronaviruses — a dereliction of duty, it “served to hamper national and international policy discussions about how to mitigate against future pandemics of any origin — natural, accidental, or deliberate.”

    Their letter calls for those who intentionally or not helped absolve the Chinese c*mmunist regime of any guilt in originating and spreading the deadly C*VID virus to be held accountable. 

    The authors also called on major news organizations “to carry out deeper investigations into the pandemic’s origins, particularly by examining all credible origins hypotheses.”

    This is the minimum they should do.

    As the letter states, American security and prosperity depend upon “rigorous scientific debate, research, and scholarship, as well as an intrepid and independent news media.”

    And all these media outlets, scientific journals, and individual journalists and experts “failed in their duty.”

    They should all be called out and shamed publicly, and they should provide the nation, and the world a very public apology.

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

    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.

    Anti-Woke ‘Radical Libertarian’ Wins Argentine Election, Trump Plans Visit

    By
    Paul Crespo
    -
    3
    Donald Trump via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    ANALYSIS – In another extremely positive political development overseas, a ‘far-right’ populist, better called an anti-woke radical libertarian, has won the presidency in Argentina.

    The leftist-hating, free market advocate, Javier Milei, hopes to shake up South America’s highly statist second-largest economy and its extreme socialist politics.

    While Argentina and the U.S. are very different political animals, and former President Trump and Milei don’t share similar views on a lot of things, Trump congratulated Milei on his landslide victory, saying he would “Make Argentina Great Again!”

    According to a statement by Milei’s press office after the two spoke on Thursday, Trump will also visit Buenos Aires to meet with the Argentine president-elect.

    One thing they do have in common is their hatred of the left and love of incendiary language (read to the end).

    A hundred years ago Argentina was one of the six wealthiest countries in the world, but thanks to the socialism of Juan and Evita Perón, and their Peronist party, the beautiful country has dropped to a dismal to 66th place, below Mexico and just above Russia.

    Milei, who leads the country’s La Libertad Avanza (Liberty Advances) party, won the presidential run-off with some 56% of the vote, well ahead of left-leaning Peronist Economy Minister Sergio Massa’s 44%. Milei will take office Dec. 10.

    The self-described anarcho-capitalist is pledging economic shock therapy, by among other things, slashing bloated government spending, shuttering the central bank, and ditching the thoroughly devalued peso for the U.S. dollar.

    These potentially painful reforms resonated with voters angry at the economic malaise. Still, as Fortune noted, Milei’s “party controls only a handful of seats in congress, and policies like dollarization would be an incredibly complex undertaking even with broad political support.”

    Meanwhile, many “investors think Milei is the best shot at salvaging the economy after years of market pain.”

    Fortune added:

    While Milei gained attention for quirks that were atypical for a potential head of state — his unusual hairdo, love of his cloned dogs and a penchant for campaigning with a chainsaw — he won fans among investors for his promise to usher in a business-friendly era for Argentina. Economic growth is elusive, the peso has lost more than 90% of its value in four years, and around 40% of the population lives in poverty.

    John Fund writes in National Review:

    Milei, a free-market economist, is an ally of both the U.S. and Israel and a sworn adversary of China and Latin American leftists. His plan to dollarize the Argentine economy will blunt China’s effort to undermine the U.S. currency. As analyst Juan P. Villasmil puts it: “Argentina’s economy is the second most powerful in South America, so having it led by an openly pro-US leader in a continent filled with socialists isn’t bad news.”

    Milei describes himself as an Austrian economist, but there is also some Chicago School influence. He named two of his dogs after Milton Friedman and Robert Lucas, and a third after Murray Rothbard.

    Elon Musk and other U.S. business leaders are already looking forward to an open and more free Argentine economy. Milei has a strong team of advisers from free market think tanks and has forged an alliance with establishment conservative parties to help him govern.

    And Milei is a firebrand and fighter much like Trump. Expect him to take a wrecking ball to the socialists. The UK’s Express quoted Milei as saying:

    “You can’t give s**t leftards an inch. All collectivists, all kinds of collectivists. […] They are s**t!

    “If you think differently from them they will kill you. This is the point. You can’t give s**t leftists an inch, if you give them an inch they will use it to destroy you.

    “You can’t negotiate with leftards. You don’t negotiate with trash because they will end you!

    Milei added: “And since they can’t beat us with real arguments, they just use the repressive apparatus of the state with loads of taxpayer money to destroy us and yet they’re still losing!”

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

    Amanda Head: Obese Celebrity Celebrates Her Own Obesity

    By
    Amanda Head
    -
    0

    Hollywood has finally gone full tilt…

    Watch Amanda break down the latest woke controversy below:

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

    Amanda Head: CNN Stabs Biden!

    By
    Amanda Head
    -
    0

    Is the mainstream media finally waking up? Not so fast…

    However, tensions between the press and the Biden administration are definitely heating up after what has been widely regarded as a friendly relationship…

    Let Amanda explain the rising feud below:

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

    Amanda Head: Southwest Airlines Ruined Christmas

    By
    Amanda Head
    -
    1

    Nobody expected Southwest Airlines to be the biggest grinch of all this Christmas.

    As a winter storm rolled through much of the United States grounding thousands of airline passengers over the Christmas holidays. While nearly every airline was forced to announce delays and cancellations Southwest airlines was by and far the worst culprit, even drawing ire from the Dept. of Transportation.

    Watch Amanda break down the controversy below:

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

    Judge Judy Labels Trump Hush Money Case ‘Nonsense’

    By
    admin
    -
    2
    Donald Trump via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    A waste of time and taxpayer dollars…

    “Judge Judy” Sheindlin called Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s (D) hush money case against former President Trump “nonsense” in a recent interview.

    “You gotta twist yourself into a pretzel to figure out what the crime was. [Bragg] doesn’t like him — New York City didn’t like him for a while,” Sheindlin said of Trump in a “Who’s Talking to Chris Wallace?” interview streaming Friday on Max.

    “I would be happier, as someone who owns property in Manhattan, if the district attorney of New York County would take care of criminals who were making it impossible for citizens to walk in the streets and use the subway, to use his efforts to keep those people off the street, than to spend $5 million or $10 million of taxpayers’ money trying Donald Trump on this nonsense,” the longtime TV judge told Wallace.

    Watch:

    “I, as a taxpayer in this country, resent using the system for your own personal self-aggrandizement,” the “Judy Justice” personality said of Bragg.

    OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

    Asked by the CNN anchor what she thought of Trump, the 81-year-old former Manhattan Family Court judge replied, “I think he was a good businessman, a real estate guy. And he was certainly terrific on ‘The Apprentice.’”

    The celebrity judge’s comments come as the Manhattan DA seeks an extension of the restraining order against former President Donald Trump. (RELATED: Manhattan DA Seeks Extended Gag Order Against Trump Amid Death Threats To Bragg)

    They argue that Trump’s public statements have increased tensions and led to threats against Bragg and his team before Trump’s July 11 sentencing.

    The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office charged Trump with 34 counts of falsifying business records as part of a hush-money scheme to prevent porn star Stormy Daniels from speaking out about her alleged extramarital affair before the 2016 presidential election.

    Before Trump, no sitting or former president ever faced criminal charges. This is the lowest level felony in New York, any potential sentence will more than likely be served after the 2024 election.

    As The New York Times reports:

    The order, issued before Mr. Trump’s Manhattan criminal trial began in mid-April, bars him from attacking witnesses, jurors, court staff and relatives of the judge who presided over the trial, Juan M. Merchan.

    Mr. Trump’s lawyers have sought to have the order lifted since Mr. Trump’s conviction in late May. But in a 19-page filing on Friday, prosecutors argued that while Justice Merchan no longer needed to enforce the portion of the gag order relating to trial witnesses, he should keep in place the provisions protecting jurors, prosecutors, court staff and their families.

    Article Published With The Permission of American Liberty News

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