ANALYSIS – Yes, it’s a big deal, that former President Donald Trump has been booked and charged in federal court with 37 counts of violating federal law. And we should be talking about it.
It’s definitely not Watergate, but some of the charges, such as obstruction, are similar to those Richard Nixon faced before he resigned in 1974.
Thirty-one of the counts are for violating the Espionage Act through “willful retention” of classified records. The other six counts include obstruction of justice and false statements stemming from his alleged efforts to impede the investigation.
Meanwhile, the media is conveniently ignoring all of Joe Biden’s brewing scandals, which are far worse; even surpassing Watergate.
We should be talking about Biden corruption, not Trump stubbornness.
Many Trump loyalists argue that the Trump indictment proves there is a double standard compared to how Biden is being treated. And I would agree.
The investigation into Hunter Biden should not have taken five years and still be unresolved.
That is an outrage.
And then there are the bribery and foreign influence peddling allegations against Joe Biden himself.
That should be the big story today. Not Trump’s rants on Truth Social about his latest legal woes.
Hillary Clinton was also treated with kid gloves by the Justice Department (DOJ) and FBI, even though she destroyed evidence from hard drives and deleted 30,000 emails, some of which may have contained classified information.
She got off. That was absolutely wrong.
If Republican ex-presidents and current presidential candidates are going to be indicted so should Democrat former Secretaries of State running for president. If not, then we have a partisan, two-tiered justice system.
And I have written about this a lot. But here is where I see things a bit differently.
We are today talking about Donald Trump and his drama, primarily because of Donald Trump. He did this one mostly to himself.
Trump could have avoided this criminal legal battle had he simply turned over all classified materials he had in his possession when asked for them over an 18-month period.
That’s what Joe Biden and former vice president Mike Pence both did when they were discovered to have ‘unknowingly’ kept classified documents after leaving office. They actually turned them over right away.
Did Biden do more than that, we don’t really know yet. But neither have been charged with any crimes.
And Trump was not charged over any materials or records that he returned. Only those he willfully kept.
Trump first made ludicrous claims about the documents, including that he had declassified them, which he hadn’t. And he fought back in court and delayed and delayed until he was forced to finally give 15 boxes of records to the National Archives and Records Administration.
But a lot more remained.
Then he began obstructing and moving the remaining boxes of records, including classified materials at his home in Florida. Despite repeated efforts by the FBI and DOJ to try to get them back, Trump refused.
And like Watergate, the cover-up is what gets you in trouble.
That is why the FBI finally raided Mar-a-Lago in August of last year. It was an unprecedented action, which I condemned at the time.
We have also since learned that the FBI had preferred to continue trying to get Trump’s lawyers to turn over the remaining classified materials and surveil Trump home in case anyone tried to remove materials, but DOJ insisted on the raid.
Maybe the raid could have been (should have been) avoided, but it was legal. And what the raid uncovered was that Trump had hidden a lot of classified materials in numerous unsecure places in his home.
Further investigation showed that Trump also had admitted on tape that he didn’t have the authority to declassify documents after leaving office, and that he hadn’t done so prior to leaving. He also reportedly flashed highly classified plans to attack Iran in front of the faces of uncleared persons visiting him.
None of this is good for Trump or the nation. The classified documents included “defense and weapons capabilities” of the United States and foreign countries.
But none of this would have been a legal issue if Trump simply turned over these extremely sensitive national security materials when requested, or at some point over the 18 months in question.
So, now instead of talking about all of the incredible Biden corruption, we are here again talking about Trump-created drama.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
Amb. Robert C. O’Brien, the Former Trump National Security Advisor, joins Liberty & Justice to discuss the Brittney Griner prisoner swap, the current state of global affairs and the Ukraine war.
Co-founder and chairman of American Global Strategies LLC. He was the 27th United States National Security Advisor from 2019 – 2021. O’Brien served as the President’s principal advisor all aspects of American foreign policy and national security affairs.
O’Brien brought a renewed focus to defense and industrial base issues to the NSC. A long-time advocate of a sea power and a 355 ship Navy, O’Brien visited leading shipyards during his tenure. He also spent time at defense plants and with our troops at bases around the world.
During O’Brien’s time as National Security Advisor, the United States orchestrated the historic Abraham Accords in the Middle East, brokered economic normalization between Serbia and Kosovo, achieved significant defense spending increases among our NATO allies and increased cooperation with America’s allies across the Indo-Pacific.
Prior to serving as NSA, O’Brien was the Special Presidential Envoy for Hostage Affairs with the personal rank of Ambassador. He was directly involved in the return of over 25 detainees and hostages to the United States. O’Brien previously served as Co-Chairman of the U.S. Department of State Public-Private Partnership for Justice Reform in Afghanistan under both Secretaries of State Rice and Clinton.
O’Brien was also a presidentially-appointed member of the U.S. Cultural Property Advisory Committee from 2008-2011. In 2005, O’Brien was nominated by President George W. Bush and unanimously confirmed by the U.S. Senate to serve as a U.S. Representative to the 60th session of the UN General Assembly. Earlier in his career, O’Brien served as a Senior Legal Officer for the UN Security Council commission that decided claims against Iraq arising out of the first Gulf War. He was a Major in the Judge Advocate General’s Corps of the U.S. Army Reserve.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – One of the most transcendent political issues today is the Left’s war on reality. Specifically, the radical efforts to push a totally made-up, anti-science, transgender ideology on society, and especially our children.
And most Republicans agree. Actually, most Americans agree.
Being on the wrong side of this issue should automatically disqualify a GOP candidate for president. And former New Jersey governor Chris Christie is wrong on this issue – big time.
During a segment on CNN’s “State of the Union” Sunday, Christie argued against state bans on sex change treatments for children, reported Fox News.
When asked about Republican governors banning life-altering, genital mutilating gender reassignment surgeries and experimental ‘puberty blockers’ drugs and hormones for minors in their states, he replied:
I don’t think that the government should ever be stepping in to the place of the parents in helping to move their children through a process where those children are confused or concerned about their gender.
To be fair, Christie also said: “What I would like to make sure each state does is require that parents are involved in these decisions.” And that is critical. But it isn’t enough.
If this was 1980, and a Republican candidate said the government shouldn’t get between parents and their children, I would wholeheartedly agree.
But in 1980 no one would have imagined a society, medical establishment, public school system and government pushing radical transgenderism on our kids, and their parents.
The world is now officially upside down. And even parents are being pressured to permanently damage their kids. The only chance we have to preserve basic human values is by Republican red states defending them wholeheartedly.
And when possible, defending them at the federal level.
Former President Donald Trump has been vocal about his stance: “These people are sick, they’re deraigned,” Trump recently said in North Carolina, speaking of those who support men competing in women’s sports.
Unfortunately for Christie, and fortunately for the rest of us, Fox News reports that a strong majority of Americans disagree with him.
A Washington Post-KFF poll “found that 68% of Americans oppose access to puberty-blocking medication for kids ages 10 to 14 and 58% oppose access to hormonal treatments for kids ages 15 to 17.”
But Christie isn’t just wrong on this extreme issue. He has been wrong on transgender issues for many years.
While serving as governor of New Jersey in 2017, Christie passed laws allowing children to use school bathrooms and locker rooms based on their gender identity rather than sex assigned at birth.
Christie’s signature also removed restrictions on biological men competing in women’s sports, an issue that the WaPo poll found over 60% of Americans think should be banned.
Christie also signed another law that year prohibiting insurance companies from denying services to anyone based on their ‘gender identity.’
In the increasingly crowded field of GOP presidential hopefuls, former President Trump, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, and former Ambassador Nikki Haley, are all on the right side. They all support restricting children under 18 years of age from receiving gender reassignment (or genital mutilation) procedures.
All three also support banning biological men from competing in women’s sports. And they are all correct.
But, as far as I’m concerned Christie just disqualified himself from being a GOP candidate for president.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – Will Kellyanne Conway return to Team Trump? As Kamala Harris, who recently stole the campaign from her boss, Joe Biden, basks in her current sugar high glory, some in the Trump campaign are wondering if his team needs a reboot.
Or maybe an injection of a 2016 winner.
And who better to revitalize Trump’s campaign, than his winning campaign manager from 2016, Kellyanne Conway.
At least Donald Trump’s wife, Melania, reportedly thinks so.
And a recent post on X showing pics of Conway and Trump together in New Jersey has fueled the speculation that a return to the campaign is in the works.
In 2016 the brash flaxen haired pollster-turned campaign chief swooped in after the campaign’s failing start with its B Team and is rightly credited as helping to get Trump across the finish line to victory against Hillary Clinton.
The outspoken adviser is seen as a trusted confidante by both the former president and, importantly, by Melania Trump who is “pushing” for Conway to return because she sees her as “a familiar face amid a sea of relative newcomers,” says Tara Palmeri in the online magazine, Puck.
Lara Trump, co-chair of the Republican National Committee and wife of Trump’s son, Eric, is also said to be pushing for Conway to be brought on board to reignite campaign stalwarts taken by surprise by Kamala Harris’ fast start after Joe Biden’s sudden departure.
One adviser told Puck that Trump listens to powerful women, more than men. “He listens to Hope Hicks. He listens to Brooke Rollins,” they tell Puck. “Ironically, he likes powerful women. If you’re a sharp woman, he will listen to you. Hope and these people could tell him the hardest shit. He may not have done anything, but at least he listens.”
While she was a key player in Trump’s 2016 win, eight years ago, she could still be the spark that relights the fire of a campaign still unsteady after Harris’ surprising Democrat Party coup and subsequent rise.
…it may also be fair to question whether his brain trust is living in the past. Chris LaCivita, who famously ran the Swift Boat Veterans campaign against John Kerry, has spearheaded an attack on Walz’s military record, but it’s yet to have the same impact as it did in 2004, when the U.S. had recently invaded Iraq. Other Trump allies are wondering if pollster Tony Fabrizio is likewise frozen in carbonite, as he considers a race-baiting strategy against Harris akin to the Willie Horton ads against Dukakis back in 1988.
Team Harris has raised $310 million in July, and another $36 million in the 24 hours after announcing her stolen Valor radical VP choice, Tim Walz.
So far Team Trump hasn’t been able to land any significant blows on his younger female political opponent.
According to Puck, Trump’s campaign team is split in half over whether she should return in a similar role to the one she had in 2016.
Meanwhile, Conway is smoothing over any ruffled feather with JD Vance after openly suggesting Marco Rubio as Trump’s VP.
As part of her mending relations effort, Conway recently tweeted “Brilliant” to Vance’s stunt when he landed at the same airport as Harris and Walz and challenged her to debate.
I thought the reporters traveling with Kamala might be a little lonely given that she never answers questions from them, so I figured I’d come say hello and check out my new plane while I was at it. https://t.co/OPEh0UKBDc
One big potential drawback to Team Trump is the fact that Conway recently registered as a $50,000- a month foreign agent for a Ukrainian oligarch.
This is already provoking accusations among her critics that it would be a conflict of interest. However, a campaign manager or advisor is not the same as a member of the administration. So, that issue may not matter much in these final three months of the campaign.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk.
CBP Photography, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
The Biden administration is unable to locate 85,000 child migrants initially processed at the U.S. border, and now members of Congress are demanding an explanation amid reports the children are being trafficked.
Seventy-six House Republican reveal in a letter that Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra and Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas are “knowingly and recklessly discharging unaccompanied children to adults across the country and doing nothing to find the tens of thousands they had lost touch with,” the Washington Examiner reports.
The letter was issued after the New York Times reported the Biden administration cannot locate 85,000 children initially processed as migrants seeking asylum, and many are being forced into child labor.
Lawmakers “referenced reports by the New York Times that concluded children were extorted by smugglers to pay off the thousands they owed through forced labor, including sex trafficking. Other children were trafficked against their will and are effectively slaves within the U.S.,” the Examiner reports
“The border crisis is not a stand-alone crisis. It has created a new catastrophe in every direction,” said Congressman Morgan Luttrell (R-TX)
“Unaccompanied migrant children are crossing our border, and Joe Biden’s failed policies aren’t leading them to the American Dream. Instead, these children are released with no follow-up and are facing forced labor, sex trafficking, and abuse,” said Luttrell.
“The policies of the Biden Administration are failing everyone. Secretary Mayorkas and President Biden not only need to address the ongoing exploitation and lack of contact with minors, but also secure our southern border and ensure people seeking to come to our great country are going through the proper, legal channels,” Luttrell added.
Even worse, it appears many of the children tried to contact U.S. officials to seek help.
“We are particularly heartbroken to read reports of children contacting HHS after their release to their sponsors in hopes of the agency intervening, with no follow up,” the letter reveals.
“The policies of this administration are enriching the cartels and transnational criminal organizations, who are profiting from the pain, abuse, and exploitation of these children as they smuggle them into the country,” the lawmakers conclude.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
Without a whisper, David Brock once again took his seat in that deep club chair, the one upholstered in battered oxblood leather and steeped in quiet menace. He reached for his tailor-crafted inner pocket, drawing from it a fresh Davidoff 702 Double R. The oily Ecuadorian leaf caught flame with practiced ease, releasing those same familiar notes of dark chocolate and café crema. Nearby, a Baccarat tumbler appeared in a silent ritual of service, filled just so with Pappy Van Winkle, as though it had always been there. This wasn’t just habit. It was stagecraft, and the man in the chair was directing a performance with constitutional consequences.
There was no need for preamble. Those in the room knew why they were there. Brock was about to reintroduce the legal profession to its own velvet-clad nightmare. His audience, a quiet circle of left-wing patrons and media barons, leaned in as he explained the next phase of his campaign, not against Donald Trump per se, but against anyone daring to offer him or his allies a legal defense. This wasn’t about winning court cases. This was about ensuring those cases were never filed at all.
The 65 Project, Brock explained, was not an electoral effort. It was not a messaging campaign. It was war. A war against the 6th Amendment, that slender but essential clause guaranteeing every American the right to legal counsel. Its aim? To deprive Republicans, particularly those challenging elections or government orthodoxy, of any capable legal defense.
Screenshot via X [Credit: @amuse]
Run through Brock’s network of nonprofits and housed under Law Works, the 65 Project deployed seasoned political operatives to file bar complaints, ethics charges, and sanctions motions against Trump-affiliated attorneys. The power of the model lay in its asymmetry. A single complaint, even meritless, could cost an attorney tens of thousands of dollars and a year or more in disciplinary review. And even if dismissed, the stain was permanent.
In 2025, this campaign has not slowed. In February, the 65 Project filed a high-profile complaint against Edward Martin, then the interim US Attorney for the District of Columbia. His offense? Alleged conflicts of interest tied to representing January 6 defendants before his federal appointment. The complaint cited violations of Rule 4-1.7 of professional conduct, a detail blasted across the headlines of friendly media outlets. As of June, there is no word on whether the complaint succeeded, but that isn’t the point. The accusation is the punishment.
Incredibly, the 65 Project also targeted the sitting Attorney General of the United States, Pam Bondi. On June 5, 2025, a coalition including the 65 Project, Democracy Defenders Fund, Lawyers Defending American Democracy, and Lawyers for the Rule of Law filed a 23-page ethics complaint with the Florida Bar, accusing Bondi of “serious professional misconduct.” The complaint alleged that Bondi threatened DOJ lawyers with discipline or termination for failing to pursue President Trump’s political objectives, particularly via a February 5 “zealous advocacy” memo. It claimed her actions led to resignations and firings in violation of DOJ norms and Florida Bar rules. Yet, on June 6, the Florida Bar summarily rejected the complaint, citing a policy against investigating sitting officers appointed under the US Constitution. It was the third such complaint against Bondi, and the third rejection. Critics like DOJ Chief of Staff Chad Mizelle called the filings “vexatious” and politically motivated. That the 65 Project would go after a sitting Attorney General at all illustrates the sheer audacity, and absurdity, of their campaign. They have announced they will be filing more complaints against Bondi.
Even more outrageous, the same coalition named two additional Trump administration officials in their June 5 complaint: Emil Bove, Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General and Todd Blanche, Deputy Attorney General. The complaint accused them contributing to a culture of unethical conduct within the Justice Department by pressuring career lawyers to ignore professional responsibilities and instead pursue political objectives at the behest of President Trump. The goal was clear: not just to intimidate one leader, but to undermine the credibility of an entire legal team working within the bounds of the law.
This complaint, like so many others, underscores the project’s enduring mission: to ensure lawyers think twice before defending Trump or any of his associates. Public defenders and private litigators alike have been swept into the net. Whether you were in court for Giuliani, or simply filed an amicus brief on election integrity, the 65 Project likely has your name on a list.
This strategy, weaponizing legal ethics as a partisan bludgeon, would have made Boss Tweed grin from ear to ear. Backroom operators like Col. George Brinton McClellan Harvey would recognize it instantly. Harvey, managing editor of the Democratic Party’s press empire at the turn of the 20th century, orchestrated conventions from smoke-filled rooms in Chicago’s Blackstone Hotel, where policies were written not in law books, but on cocktail napkins between puffs of Havana cigars. Brock, in many ways, is his spiritual heir, using legal bureaucracy the way Harvey used ink and influence.
The Biden-appointed judiciary has not resisted. In Michigan, Democratic activists succeeded in convincing a federal judge to sanction every lawyer who filed election-related litigation for Trump in 2020. Among them: Lin Wood, Sidney Powell, and Stefanie Junttila. Each was ordered to pay legal fees to Democratic Party groups and attend re-education courses, under the euphemism of continuing legal education. The court referred them for possible disbarment, fulfilling Brock’s vision.
Michael Teter, managing director of the 65 Project, has filed complaints against more than 100 attorneys across 26 states. The targets include high-profile figures like Jenna Ellis, John Eastman, and Cleta Mitchell. And while many of these complaints were dismissed by mid-2023, the damage to reputations and client relationships lingers.
The project’s tactics have drawn sharp rebuke. Congressman Lance Gooden, in April 2025, called the 65 Project a “political hit squad” and demanded a Justice Department investigation. Others on social media have accused the group of colluding with establishment Republicans to kneecap Trump’s legal allies. Yet Brock’s defenders frame the group as guardians of democracy, protecting the legal profession from ethical collapse.
Such framing is dishonest. When Alan Dershowitz defended Al Gore in 2000, no one suggested he should be disbarred for challenging election results. But now, lawyers challenging questionable election conduct on behalf of Republicans face professional ruin. This is not accountability. It is ideological warfare.
Critics may point out that the 65 Project has not secured many disbarments. That may be true, but they have achieved some high-profile penalties. Jenna Ellis was publicly censured by a Colorado judge in March 2023. Rudy Giuliani had his law license suspended in New York and is facing permanent disbarment proceedings in Washington, DC. John Eastman was disbarred in California following a March 27, 2024, decision by State Bar Court Judge Yvette Roland, who found him culpable of 10 out of 11 disciplinary charges related to his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. His license was placed on involuntary inactive status days later, rendering him ineligible to practice law in California. Eastman has appealed, but as of June 15, 2025, no reversal has been reported. He was also suspended from practicing law in Washington, DC, on May 3, 2024, pending resolution of the California case. Lin Wood surrendered his law license in Georgia under pressure from multiple complaints. These results are rare but not insignificant. Still, the goal was never just disbarment. It was deterrence. It was a public display of consequence, a digital scarlet letter. No need to win in court when you can win in LinkedIn’s HR department.
The project has inspired imitators including the Democracy Defenders Fund, Lawyers Defending American Democracy, and Lawyers for the Rule of Law. The Lincoln Project also targets law firms, encouraging junior associates to pressure partners against accepting GOP clients. Shutdown DC and the Un-American Bar maintain lists of “insurrectionist” lawyers. Others push the American Bar Association to adopt rules banning election challenges altogether, cloaking censorship in the rhetoric of professionalism.
Marc Elias, the left’s court general, has taken the mission even further, seeking to disqualify GOP candidates under the 14th Amendment, resurrecting post-Civil War measures to bar Trump allies from holding office. Lawsuits against Paul Gosar, Andy Biggs, and others reflect this broader ecosystem of lawfare. It is a constellation of coordinated attacks designed to render conservative legal advocacy untenable.
And what of the Constitution? The Sixth Amendment was never meant to be partisan. It exists not to protect the powerful, but the accused. In America, even pariahs have lawyers. Even the guilty deserve defense. The 65 Project’s perverse genius is to flip that premise, treating legal representation as complicity, and enforcing political loyalty through professional terror.
David Brock did not build this machinery alone. Melissa Moss, a Clinton veteran, helped architect the effort. She recruited Democratic grandees, Tom Daschle, ABA presidents, former state judges, to lend legitimacy. Their goal? To make conservative legal advocacy professionally radioactive.
And it may be working. Some lawyers are declining GOP clients outright. Others fear disciplinary complaints, X mobs, or worse. The chilling effect is real, and precisely what the architects intended. The War on the Sixth is a war on courage, a war on professional independence, a war on the idea that justice should be blind.
In the end, Brock’s smoke-filled rooms are not about cigars or cocktails. They are about control. They are about ensuring that when Republicans step into a courtroom, they do so alone.
ANALYSIS – As the left implodes over Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter and many triggered liberals threaten to abandon the platform, conservatives are breathing a sigh of relief.
For years now, but increasingly since Donald Trump was elected, Big Tech has been on a rampage against mainstream conservative ideas and opinions.
Often, Big Tech employees and executives have been found overtly colluding with the Democrats in Washington to spread their agenda and talking points while quashing and canceling any opposing (i.e.; conservative views).
Their weapons of choice – ‘independent fact checking’ (aka – their leftist views on things by fellow leftists) and of course, the ubiquitous and amorphous company ‘terms of use,’ ‘community standards,’ and unknowable internal policies, which seem to always target conservatives while giving leftists and other radicals a pass.
Most conservatives know all this, but many independents and liberals do not.
Then there are those who do, and don’t care. Or do – and lie about it.
But how can we show just how bad things were at Twitter (and by extension other Big Tech platforms, including Facebook, and the often-overlooked LinkedIn, where I was permanently banned).
Well, we can thank Musk for uncovering the depths of leftist wokeness which had spread like ideological cancer at Twitter.
On Tuesday, as Musk continued his overhaul of Twitter, he said he had stumbled upon a closet chock full of “#StayWoke” t-shirts at the company’s headquarters.
Fox Business noted that Twitter co-founder and former CEO Jack Dorsey infamously wore a “#StayWoke” t-shirt during an interview with journalist Peter Kafka for ReCode’s Code conference over six years ago in 2016.
When asked to explain his shirt, Dorsey said the meaning has evolved over time but “to me… it’s really being aware, and staying aware, and keep questioning.”
Unfortunately, that is NOT the meaning of ‘woke’ most follow today.
Instead, it now means an increasingly intolerant leftist ideology centered on promoting radical agendas such as transgender transitioning of children, bullying friends, and allies to accept LGBT views and policies, and imposing anti-white racist indoctrination, along with many other extremist and socialist ideas.
And along with this agenda, leftist ‘wokesters’ also believe in crushing any dissent of these radical views, by censoring or canceling anyone who dares disagree.
As Fox Business wrote: “With the rise of cancel culture, many have interpreted “woke” to describe people who would rather silence their critics than listen to them.”
Hopefully, this will now change; at least at Twitter. And Musk believes it will:
As he said this week: “More and more over time, as we hew closer to the truth, Twitter will earn the trust of the people…”
More and more over time, as we hew closer to the truth, Twitter will earn the trust of the people
With Musk’s takeover of Twitter, and the GOP’s takeover of the House, as well as Florida Governor Rion DeSantis’ victories against the left, we may be seeing a turning point in the ‘woke wars.’
Now if Musk will only buy LinkedIn too, so I can recover my profile and 20,000 followers.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
ANALYSIS – Your federal tax dollars, hard at work – The far-left l*nacy has taken control of so many formerly respected American institutions, it’s tough for some of them to outdo themselves.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) though wasn’t content just m*sinforming Americans about C*VID-19’s o*igins, risks, m*sking, and l*ckd*wns, it is now promoting l*ftist ins*nity and likely endangering the health of babies.
And it is time for Congress to investigate.
The CDC, with a $12 billion budget and more than 12,000 employees, is an Atlanta-based federal agency tasked with protecting Americans from disease outbreaks and other public health threats. Dr. Rochelle Walensky, ex-head of the CDC under Joe Biden resigned effective June 30, without explanation.
Previously an infectious-diseases specialist at Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital, Walensky had no experience running a government agency prior to being picked for the job by Biden.
The agency recently published advice for ‘tr*ns-id*ntified’ and ‘n*n-bi*ary’ individuals (aka m*n) on how to bre*stfeed their infants, which the health agency called “ch*stfe*ding.”
CDC gives guidance for trans people 'chestfeeding' kids, accused of failing to consider possible health risks https://t.co/FgmE3txKV9
Biological men who tr*nsition to women can produce a form of br*astmilk by taking a cocktail of h*rmone drugs that mimic the changes a woman’s body undergoes during the late stages of pregnancy and shortly after the birth of a child.
Initially developed for biological women who adopted or had a child via surrogacy and wanted to bre*stfeed, it’s called the N*wman-G*ldfarb pr*tocol, and it tricks the body into l*ctating.
The CDC’s Health Equity Considerations page explains that these bi*logical men don’t need to physically have a child to feed a child from the ch*st: “An individual does not need to have given birth to br*astfeed or ch*stfeed,” the CDC website reads.
The now thoroughly discredited agency also notes that br*astfeeding can be referred to as ‘b*dyfeeding’ which sounds like it’s describing something gr*tesque out of a ho*ror movie.
It notes: “Some families may have other preferred terminology for how they feed their babies, such as nursing, ch*stfeeding, or bo*yf*eding.”
Jay W. Richards, a senior research fellow in religious liberty and civil society at the Heritage Foundation, called for greater review of the health agency from congressional leaders.
He told The Christian Post that the CDC showed a willingness to put politics ahead of public health during C*VID, adding that the “latest debacle” over “ch*stf*eding is even worse.”
Encouraging bi*logical men on off-label g*nder ch*nge drugs to ‘ch*stfeed’ babies is crazy, and risky.
“The agency seems to be tacitly endorsing males’ chestfeeding’ infants with the help of experimental drug cocktail now proves that the CDC has been captured by an ideology that puts the fetishes of disturbed men over the wellbeing of infants,” Richards stated. “It doesn’t even pretend that these experiments have been carefully tested. Its commitment to so-called ‘health equity’ seems to override any old-timey concerns about the effects of drugs, and weird discharges from male bodies, on defenseless infants.”
The CDC’s endorsement of biological men feeding infants directly from the breast has also received pushback from several health experts, who warn that the long-term impact of the practice is not well-known.
U.S. Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kansas, who served as an Obstetrician for 25 years and delivered over 5,000 babies, said in a statement that the CDC statement is “irresponsible” “defies science and safety.”
“In my opinion, the CDC has lost all credibility and is in direct conflict with the FDA for marketing a non-FDA approved drug,” Marshall said. “A biological male filled with hormones and a concoction of other drugs that have not been studied that could harm a baby should NEVER be encouraged. When will the Woke Left wake up and realize what they are doing to our country?”
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
ANALYSIS – When Republican governors Ron DeSantis of Florida and Greg Abbott of Texas began busing illegal migrants from their states to deep blue ‘sanctuary’ cities like New York City, Chicago, and Washington, D.C., Democrats, and the establishment media called it a political ‘stunt.’
Colorado Gov. Jared Polis, a Democrat, leading another state suffering from the same migrant crisis, has also sent migrants from his state to sanctuary cities in recent months.
Abbott has been the most prolific bussing migrants north.
DeSantis sent a couple of busloads to the uber liberal and wealthy enclave of Martha’s Vineyard, the exclusive Massachusetts island that is a regular playground for liberal Hollywood and DC elites.
The governors want to put the pressure of Joe Biden’s horrendous border and immigration policies on the front stoops of big city Democrat mayors, instead of the backyards of mostly red Republican border states.
They also wanted to highlight the issue nationally and emphasize the sheer insanity of the entire sanctuary city concept where illegal aliens are virtually invited to come and stay, safe from federal law enforcement.
And the governors’ ‘stunt’ appears to be working.
Both the outgoing mayor of Chicago and the new mayor of NYC are begging for help with the crush of these migrants.
NYC Mayor Eric Adams, a national surrogate for Biden, has been the most outspoken, recently saying Biden has “failed” his city which is being “destroyed by the migrant crisis.”
Mayor Lori Lightfoot of Chicago sent a letter to Abbott on Sunday requesting that he stop sending busloads of migrants to the Windy City over what she called political motivations.
She said the city has been caring for more than 8,000 penniless migrants since the first buses arrived from Texas in August. And the number is growing.
But Abbott began sending migrant buses to these blue cities in the fall as a response to the surge of migrant crossings at the southern border caused by Bien’s obscene and likely illegal immigration policies.
Abbott has said the migrant ‘relocations will continue until the federal government secures the border.
In her letter, Lightfoot said she is sympathetic to the challenges of border towns in Texas but wrote:
Chicago is a Welcoming City and we collaborate with County, State, and community partners to rise to this challenge, but your lack of consideration or coordination in an attempt to cause chaos and score political points has resulted in a critical tipping point in our ability to receive individuals and families in a safe, orderly, and dignified way.
Well, good. Now she can truly be ‘sympathetic’ to the border towns suffering under the stampede of illegal migrants Biden is allowing into the country.
She added a bunch of other claptrap in her letter blaming Abbott for being heartless and creating a humanitarian crisis, etc.
Unfortunately, what she totally ignores is that her ‘welcoming’ policies, and those of her party and the president, are the direct cause of the migrant crisis.
Meanwhile, Politico reports that “Republicans just gained an unlikely ally in their attacks on the president’s immigration policies: the Democratic mayor of New York.”
Unlike Lightfoot, Adams seems to get it.
GOP leaders high-fived this month after hearing Mayor Adams say Biden had “failed” the city on immigration and that NYC “is being destroyed by the migrant crisis.”
In this past year, more than 57,000 migrants have arrived in New York after crossing the southern border. Some were sent from states like Texas, but others arrived on their own.
City services used to house, feed, educate, and provide health care to newcomers are estimated to cost taxpayers $2.9 billion next year alone.
This is more than the entire NYC Fire Department operating budget.
Adams’ new rhetoric has drawn praise from some Republicans and the conservative editorial page of the New York Post.
His words have also echoed remarks by Fox News contributor Sean Duffy.
But not all Republicans are cheering for Adams. Rep. Chip Roy of Texas wasn’t quite ready to applaud the New York mayor.
“Eric Adams is right to blame the Biden Administration for the border crisis, but this is the same guy who campaigned on his city’s sanctuary status and extended childcare, colleague classes and other taxpayer-funded programs to illegal migrants,” Roy said in a statement.
“Texas has been bearing the brunt of this crisis for over two years — now New York is getting a taste of their own medicine.”
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
