Home Blog Page 190

We Should Be Talking About Biden Corruption not Trump-Created Drama

By
Paul Crespo
-
2
Joe Biden via Gage Skidmore Flickr

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.

Democrat Prosecutor Drops Probe Into Trump Golf Course

By
Madeleine Jackson
-
5
Donald Trump via Gage Skidmore Flickr

Donald Trump has just secured a substantial legal victory.

A New York prosecutor has dropped a two-year tax investigation into a golf course owned by former President Donald Trump. 

Westchester County District Attorney Miriam Rocah announced that no charges would be filed against the former president or the Trump Organization following an investigation into allegations that Trump’s business had provided dishonest property evaluations to save on taxes. 

“AFTER GOING THROUGH A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION FOR TWO YEARS BY THE DISTRICT ATTORNEYS OFFICE IN WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK, IT WAS JUST ANNOUNCED THAT THE CASE HAS BEEN DROPPED, AND NO CHARGES WILL BE FILED,” the former president said in a statement on Truth Social. “THIS WAS THE HONORABLE THING TO DO IN THAT I DID NOTHING WRONG, BUT WHERE AND WHEN DO I GET MY REPUTATION BACK? WHEN WILL THE OTHER FAKE CASES AGAINST ME BE DROPPED? ELECTION INTERFERENCE!!!”

The probe focused on taxes related to the Trump National Golf Club in Briarcliff Manor, located in Westchester County. 

“The Westchester County District Attorney’s Office conducted an investigation regarding certain properties owned by Donald J. Trump and/or the Trump Organization located in Westchester County, New York,” Rocah’s office said in a statement.”Our investigation is now closed. We approached this investigation as we do all of our investigations, objectively, and independent of politics, party affiliation and personal or political beliefs.”

“It’s really important, more important than ever in our country, to make sure that people understand that we have independent prosecutors, we have a justice system that operates independent of politics,” she said to CBS News. 

The legal victory for Trump comes as he faces 37 federal charges related to his handling of classified documents and charges in Manhattan over alleged payments to Stormy Daniels. 

Clueless Deputy Chief of Space Force Takes Sides in ‘Woke Wars’

By
Paul Crespo
-
4
PETERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Colo. -- Col. DeAnna Burt, 50th Space Wing commander, speaks to Airmen and civilians attending the Women's Leadership Symposium at the Peterson Club on Tuesday, Mar. 7th, 2017. Attendees came from a variety of bases, including Buckley, Peterson, Schriever, Vandenberg and Cheyenne Mountain. (U.S. Air Force photo/Senior Airman Laura Turner)

ANALYSIS – You would think that a senior U.S. military officer would finally have figured out that they should stay out of the ‘woke wars’ 

Unfortunately, Lt. Gen. DeAnna Burt, deputy chief of space operations at the U.S. Space Force (USSF), appears to have not gotten the memo.

Even as the Pentagon cracks down on ridiculous Drag Queen shows, and the Congress pushes to eliminate woke policies like taxpayer-funded abortion travel, and ‘diversity’ programs that are more divisive than inclusive, Burt decided now was the time to rail against what she called “anti-LGBTQ+ laws” at the state level.

She made her speech at a Pentagon ‘Pride’ event last week.

Fox News reported that she “claimed that such laws affect her hiring and promotion decisions, sometimes leading her to choose a “less qualified” candidate because of a preferred candidate’s ‘personal circumstances.’”

Yes. She said that.

Fox said that Burt told those attending the event:

Transformational cultural change requires leadership from the top, and we do not have time to wait. Since January of this year, more than 400 anti-LGBTQ+ laws have been introduced at the state level. That number is rising and demonstrates a trend that could be dangerous for service members, their families, and the readiness of the force as a whole. 

Fox News explained:

The “anti-LGBTQ+ laws” Burt mentioned appeared to be referencing the legislation passed by more than 20 states restricting or banning gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors, as well as numerous bills limiting the amount of time in which an abortion can be performed during a pregnancy.

Most of these GOP-led state laws are perfectly reasonable, and designed to protect unborn children, and their mothers, as well as protect kids being pushed into irreversible transgender medical procedures.

They are also totally outside her purview, and democratically established by state legislatures.

But to Burt, they are so dangerous she prefers to hire less qualified candidates due to their ‘personal circumstances,’ rather than subject them to these states’ laws. 

Fox News quoted her as saying:

When I look at potential candidates, say, for squadron command, I strive to match the right person to the right job. I consider their job performance and relevant experience first. However, I also look at their personal circumstances, and their family is also an important factor. 

If the good match for a job does not feel safe being themselves and performing at their highest potential at a given location, or if their family could be denied critical health care due to the laws in that state, I am compelled to consider a different candidate, and, perhaps, less qualified. 

Which part of ‘don’t get into partisan politics or the culture wars’ doesn’t she understand. And hiring less qualified people for a job based on ‘personal circumstances’ sounds like discrimination to me. 

Not to mention horrible leadership, dangerous to national security, and bad for America.

But it’s not just one senior leader at USSF. According to leaked emails, last month, two Navy officials derided critics of the service’s promotion of LGBTQ+ Pride as “bigots” and “a—holes.”

These two ‘Pride Pushers’ reportedly schemed on how to best post a “rainbow wingtip graphic” for LGBTQ+ Pride Month on the Navy social media accounts.

As I wrote about then, the Navy only had one Pride image up on social media for less than a day on June 1st, the start of ‘Pride Month,’ before removing it.

None of the other services posted Pride imagery this year, a stark difference from last year when ‘Pride Month’ began.

This is hopefully part of a broader Pentagon policy to pull out of the ‘woke wars’ and keep partisan, ideological, racial, and sexual politics out of our military.

I noted earlier: “Only the Coast Guard and the National Guard made posts for Pride Month, but neither service changed its profile pictures or header image. Hopefully, they will soon get the memo.”

Well, now I add – these navy officials and Lt. Gen. Burt should also get the memo, or even better, an invitation to a Congressional hearing to explain themselves.

It’s time to focus on real wars, not woke ones.

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

Amanda Head: Celebrity Abandons Woke Pronouns!

By
Amanda Head
-
1
Amanda Head screenshot

It’s about time.

Watch Amanda explain the situation below:

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

Report: Trump Refused Settlement in Classified Docs Case

By
Madeleine Jackson
-
5
Gage Skidmore Flickr

Will Donald Trump end up regretting this move?

New reports indicate the former president rejected his attorney’s idea to approach the Justice Department (DOJ) with a settlement offer in the contentious classified documents case to avoid potential charges.

The Hill reports:

Three unidentified sources briefed on the matter told the Post that Christopher Kise proposed quietly approaching the DOJ to reach an agreement that would include the promised return of all remaining documents in Trump’s possession and no indictment. Kise reportedly wanted to try to “take the temperature down” and hoped that the DOJ would agree to avoid indicting a former president. 

The Post reported that the offer was one of several times in which the former president’s attorneys tried to get him to cooperate with the investigation into the classified and sensitive documents kept at his Mar-a-Lago property in Palm Beach, Fla., after his presidency ended. 

Seven unidentified Trump advisers with knowledge of the investigation told the Post that the former president told his advisers that the boxes of documents only contained newspaper clippings and clothes and ignored warnings from them about pending legal issues. 

However, other attorneys reportedly pushed Trump to take a harsh stance against the investigation and Kisa ultimately never approached the DOJ with the proposal.

Months later Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Jack Smith as the special counsel to oversee the investigation. Last week, a 37-count indictment was filed against Trump, making him the first former president to face federal charges. The indictment includes 31 counts of the willful retention of documents in violation of the Espionage Act. 

Trump campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung told the Post that Trump told the DOJ, “you need anything from us, just let us know.” 

“Sadly, the weaponized DOJ rejected this offer of cooperation and conducted an unnecessary and unconstitutional raid on the President’s home in order to inflict maximum political damage on the leading presidential candidate,” Cheung said. 

Is Biden’s DOJ Out to Get Trump? Or Did Trump Do This to Himself?

By
Paul Crespo
-
3
Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

In an event unprecedented in American history, a former U.S. president, protected by U.S. Secret Service agents, and currently running for president, was booked on federal criminal charges Tuesday by U.S. Marshals at the U.S. federal courthouse in Miami, before being taken to be fingerprinted and processed.

Donald Trump pled ‘not guilty’ to all charges.

The charges relate to Trump taking a lot of highly classified documents from the White House after he left office. And once discovered, he gave multiple bizarre reasons for having them.

According to the indictment, the highly sensitive materials Trump kept included documents about overseas nuclear weapons holdings and various military plans.

But they are really all about the fact that he refused to turn many of them over for upwards of 18 months. And I have criticized Trump for doing that.

So, did Hillary Clinton get treated differently? Of course! And is Joe Biden’s Department of Justice (DOJ) out to get Trump?

Absolutely! That’s a given.

But Trump could still have avoided all this had he behaved differently, before and after he got caught. And that’s important too.

As with Richard Nixon and Watergate, it was about the cover up.

The 37 charges against Trump include violations of the Espionage Act or the willful retention of national security information as well as one count of “conspiracy to obstruct justice,” one count of “withholding a document or record,” one count of “corruptly concealing a document or record,” one count of “concealing a document in a deferral investigation,” one count of “scheme to conceal” and one count of “false statements and representations.”

Based on the evidence represented in the indictment, and from his own words and deeds, it seems that he did do most of the things he is accused of, despite the Team Trump calls that this is only a political prosecution.

I have said before that Trump basically dared the Justice Department to come after him. And I still believe that had Trump simply turned over all the classified materials when they were first requested, this would have likely ended last year without any criminal proceedings.

But Trump didn’t.

The FBI then conducted a very showy surprise raid on the ex-president’s Florida home, Mar-a-Lago, on August 8, 2022. That raid, and the documents recovered there, eventually led to the 37-count indictment that now put Trump where he is.

THE FBI RAID ON MAR-A-LAGO

Many condemned the FBI raid that launched all this as unprecedented and wrong, including me. I argued that it sent a horrible message to the world and looked highly political. (As does the indictment, arrest, and potential trial).

Apparently, the FBI had doubts about the raid as well.

Steven D’Antuono, who left the FBI late last year, explained the FBI-DOJ disagreements over the planning and execution of the Mar-a-Lago search during an interview last week with the House Judiciary Committee.

While he called the back-and-forth between DOJ and the FBI “an everyday discussion,” he noted that it still created “consternation” among the law enforcement officials, reported Politico.

According to the interview transcripts reviewed by Politico, D’Antuono said DOJ wanted the FBI to quickly seize the classified documents from Mar-a-Lago, claiming they could fall into the wrong hands. But the FBI’s Washington Field Office team preferred to seek Trump’s permission, through his attorneys, to search the premises.

The FBI even proposed a plan to surveil Mar-a-Lago in case Trump’s team tried taking any of the disputed papers offsite, according to D’Antuono.

The FBI “had a plan in place to have surveillance around if we needed to,” he said.

“Again, no one was there. So, if they brought in — they – meaning the [former] president’s, you know, people — brought in a big box truck, we would see it, right, and we would have the search warrant in hand and be able to act at that point.”

In the end, DOJ got its way, and they conducted the surprise raid. Fortunately, Trump wasn’t there when it occurred. And that was at least something.

“I didn’t want the spectacle for obvious reasons of why we’re sitting here today. … It’s a reputational risk, right, and that’s the way I looked at it from the Bureau,” reported Politico.

Unfortunately, the FBI has still suffered a great deal of reputational risk, as has the DOJ under Biden. This all stinks as political.

But Trump has played a big part in all this as well.

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

Cruz Drops Bombshell Bill to Stop Scheme That Uses Taxpayer Funds to Push Companies into Woke Socialism

By
Donny Ferguson
-
1
Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America,

The federal government could no longer use taxpayer-funded retirement accounts to push companies to adopt leftist political policies, under a new bill from U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz.

The move counters a recent strategy by leftist radicals to gain control over the voting shares of publicly-held corporations, then vote in radical leftist policies that push “woke” social goals and divert billions in cash to activist groups.

One of the biggest shareholders in many corporations are retirement funds held by and managed for federal employees by BlackRock, a far-left, multinational hedge fund.

Cruz has introduced the Stop TSP ESG Act, which “will prevent companies that manage investment funds held in federal employee retirement accounts from using those holdings to vote in corporate shareholder meetings to force leftist Environmental, Social, Governance (ESG) and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) policies onto private sector businesses.”

Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.) is co-sponsoring the bill in the Senate. 

Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) previously introduced companion legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives.

“BlackRock is able to leverage its position as the fund manager to vote in shareholder meetings and to force publicly traded companies to adopt ESG and DEI policies, even if doing so adversely affects investor value. As such, BlackRock prioritizes its political agenda over the interests of employees and retirees who are seeking to maximize their return on investment,” a statement from Cruz’s office reads.

 “I am proud to join Congressman Buck and sponsor this legislation in the Senate to hold investment fund managers accountable and ensure they do not misuse their position as a fiduciary to advance an agenda contrary to the interests of their investors,” said Cruz.

“As the managing entity of TSP, BlackRock is leveraging the financial weight of the federal retirement system to push their woke ESG and DEI ideology through other peoples’ investments. BlackRock’s manipulation and brazen politicization of federal retirement accounts is wrong and should not be tolerated,” said Cruz.

“For years, BlackRock has been leveraging taxpayer money to force unwilling businesses to accept ESG and DEI policies. Through its position as the manager of the federal Thrift Savings Plan, BlackRock has abused public capital to push a radical agenda and censor conservative media,” said Buck.

 “Woke Wall Street has been using the federal Thrift Savings Plan to force a radical left-wing agenda on the country. That’s a violation of their fiduciary duty and the basic precepts of democracy. Policy should be made in Congress, not BlackRock’s C-Suite,” said Will Hild, Executive Director at Consumers’ Research.

“The Stop TSP ESG Act is an important step in stopping the radical ESG agenda by protecting TSP account holders. BlackRock CEO Larry Fink admits to ‘forcing behaviors.’ Shareholders may be unknowingly supporting companies that disparage their values as proxy voting decisions are made by these radicals. Thank you, Rep. Buck, for introducing this legislation,” said Penny Nance, CEO and President of Concerned Women for America Legislative Action Committee.

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

Billionaire Donor Says This Republican Governor Is His ‘Ideal’ White House Candidate

By
Madeleine Jackson
-
1
Gage Skidmore Flickr

While the 2024 Republican primary field continues to attract high-profile contenders to the ring some top GOP donors are holding out hope for another candidate.

Interactive Brokers founder Thomas Peterffy, a billionaire who has supported Republican candidates in the past, says he hopes Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin takes the leap.

“I would like to vote for a person who, in my view, is most likely to be able to win the general election. And accordingly, we have to pick somebody in primaries that we believe is most likely to win the general. And that is going to be a person that I believe is more likely to be a centrist candidate, “Peterffy said on Tuesday. 

“I think that [Glenn Youngkin] would be an ideal candidate, although it is not very likely that he’s going to run. Not at this point, certainly,” he added. 

“I think that he is the person that most people will find very, very attractive,” he said. “And he goes along with the main Republican ideals of individual freedom and economic freedom. And that’s where the issue basically is. And less regulation, smaller government, etc.”

Peterffy noted that his experience growing up in a Socialist country has only made him more determined to support candidates that will prevent the U.S. from becoming a Socialist country.

“I grew up in a socialist country, and I’m deathly afraid of ending up in the same situation, and I will do practically anything to avoid it,” he said.

Despite interest from outside parties, Gov. Youngkin has been hesitant to enter the 2024 primary field.

Last month, reports indicated the Virginia governor is “reconsidering” mounting a 2024 bid for the White House despite previously refuting such claims. (RELATED: Republican Gov. ‘Reconsidering’ White House Bid)

“He’s reconsidering,” a source close to Youngkin told Axios. “He’d be in his own lane: He’s not never-Trump, and he’s not Trump-light.”

The other Soros: Senator Reveals How this Liberal Swiss Billionaire Has Been Funneling Cash into US Elections

By
Donny Ferguson
-
2
Image via Pixabay free images

A left-wing Swiss billionaire has been bankrolling the voting systems used in American elections, with an alleged bias toward liberals, a U.S. senator reveals.

United States Senator Bill Hagerty (R-TN), a member of the Senate Rules Committee, pressed Benjamin Hovland, Vice Chair of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC), on foreign influence in U.S. elections through what he called “a new form of Zuckerbucks: partisan, foreign-backed funding for local election administrators through the U.S. Alliance for Election Excellence.”

Hagerty calls it a “highly problematic scheme in which left-wing organizations provide substantial, foreign-funded resources for conducting American elections at the local level.”

Much of the funding comes from Hansjörg Wyss, a Swiss billionaire and multi-million dollar donor to left-wing causes through his “Hub Project.”

“This is an $80 million initiative, funded by a web of left-wing entities, to ‘help’ local election administrators conduct elections,” Hagerty explained. “It’s a new form of ‘Zuckerbucks,’ is what it is. This network of entities has received tens—if not hundreds—of millions of dollars from a foreign left-wing billionaire named Hansjörg Wyss. He’s not a U.S. Citizen, so he can’t contribute directly to our elections, but he’s found a way to be involved in our elections.”

“After being repeatedly pressed by Hagerty to acknowledge whether foreign donations used to conduct American elections are acceptable, Vice Chair Hovland conceded that this interference is inappropriate,” a statement from Hagerty’s office reveals.

“Absolutely not. Of course not,” Vice Chair Hovland answered. 

“I want to be clear with that because what this is is Zuckerbucks 2.0 coming from a foreign billionaire involving themselves in our elections. What I want to make certain is that this Commission—that no Election Assistance Commission dollars are commingled in any way with these foreign funds,” said Hagerty.

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.

1...189190191...268Page 190 of 268
© Great America News Desk 2022