All Americans need to understand people like AOC, she does not have our values. She does not work for the people, like Kamala Harris, they are Progressives and are trying to build their own portfolio not the citizens of our country.
****
One damning video will haunt Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for the rest of her life Posted on December 12, 2024
Photo by Matt Johnson, CC BY 2.0, via Flickr, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ The media is already talking about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as a potential 2028 Presidential contender.
But Ocasio-Cortez now has a big problem on her hands.
And that’s because one damning video will haunt Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for the rest of her life.
The Daniel Penny verdict is an eternal shame for the Left Alvin Bragg arrested Daniel Penny and charged him with manslaughter in the death of Jordan Neely.
Neely was a career criminal who’d been arrested more than 40 times.
Penny was a passenger on a subway car where he witnessed Neely threatening violence against other passengers and declaring he was ready to go to jail for the rest of his life.
At that point Penny – a former Marine – knew he had to take action to save lives.
Penny put Neely in a restraining hold for six minutes.
Neely later died.
Police initially let Penny walk after interviewing him, as they clearly recognized Penny acted in defense of innocents to save lives.
But Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg arrested Penny after pressure from Black Lives Matter.
Bragg is up for re-election in 2025 and the last thing Bragg wanted was a problem on his left flank.
That resulted in Brag unjustly indicting Penny on manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide charges.
Thankfully justice prevailed as the jury acquitted Penny on the criminally negligent homicide charge after deadlocking on manslaughter.
Penny won his freedom.
Penny trial calls attention to Ocasio-Cortez’s insane position on law and order In addition to Alvin Bragg, one of the other villains of the Penny trial was Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
The X account End Wokeness reposted a video from before Penny’s trial took place where Ocasio-Cortez claimed Penny – who stopped a deranged career criminal from following through on threats to harm other passengers – was the real threat because he said he would do it all over again to protect lives.
“If we do not want violence on the subways and the point of our justice system is a level of accountability to prevent a person who does not have remorse about taking another person’s life,” Ocasio-Cortez ranted.
“I mean even people who have engaged in manslaughter or have taken a life accidentally express remorse,” Ocasio-Cortez added.
“The fact that a person has expressed no remorse indicates a risk that it may happen again. And if we do not want to unleash that level of violence then we should exert a level of accountability to prevent that from happening,” Ocasio-Cortez concluded.
Ocasio-Cortez was referring to a response Penny gave to the New York Post where the paper asked him if, knowing what he knows now, he would do the same thing again.
“I would — if there was a threat and danger in the present,” Penny replied.
Ocasio-Cortez could very well be the Democrat Party nominee for President in 2028.
If that is the case, Ocasio-Cortez will face the same headwinds as Kamala Harris for her extreme positions in the past.
Voters rejected Kamala Harris because they viewed her as too far out of the mainstream, thanks to positions Kamala took, such as defunding the police and taxpayer-funded transgender surgery for federal prisoners.
The Democrats nominating Ocasio-Cortez – who thought a brave Marine like Daniel Penny belonged behind bars – would show the party hasn’t really processed the message of the 2024 election.
New York City community activist Ramses Frias calls for change ‘immediately’ in Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’, D-N.Y., district and reacts to the indictment of Mayor Eric Adams
Follow America’s fastest-growing news aggregator, Spreely News, and stay informed. You can find all of our articles plus information from your favorite Conservative voices.
Representative Barry Loudermilk (R-GA), Chair of the House Administration Subcommittee on Oversight, has accused the Pentagon of deliberate inaction during the January 6, 2021, Capitol riots. In a strongly worded letter to Defense Department Inspector General Robert P. Storch, Loudermilk claimed the Department of Defense (DoD) intentionally delayed deploying the D.C. National Guard (DCNG) and issued a misleading report to shield senior officials from accountability.
The letter challenges the credibility of the DoD Inspector General’s Report No. 2022-039, which was presented as a comprehensive review of the Pentagon’s role in managing the Capitol breach. According to Loudermilk, the report is rife with inaccuracies and omits critical evidence of systemic failures.
Loudermilk’s investigation highlights the failure of key Pentagon officials, including then-Secretary of the Army Ryan McCarthy, to relay deployment orders to Major General William Walker, the DCNG Commander. This delay, Loudermilk asserts, left Capitol security personnel vulnerable during the critical early hours of the riot.
The subcommittee also criticized the DoD Inspector General’s report for disregarding testimony that allegedly exposed misconduct at the highest levels of the Pentagon.
“The report whitewashes the Pentagon’s actions on January 6 and ignores testimony that directly implicates senior officials,” Loudermilk stated in his letter.
The Subcommittee on Oversight was created to investigate the security failures surrounding January 6. Loudermilk described the Pentagon’s handling of the situation as a “systemic failure” and accused the DoD of prioritizing political optics over public safety.
The subcommittee’s findings suggest that delays in National Guard deployment were not merely bureaucratic errors but potentially deliberate actions designed to minimize backlash against senior Pentagon officials.
Loudermilk has called on Inspector General Storch to reevaluate the report and address the alleged omissions. The subcommittee also plans to hold additional hearings to uncover the full extent of Pentagon involvement in the January 6 security breakdown.
“We owe it to the American people to ensure the truth is known,” Loudermilk concluded.
This latest development adds fuel to the ongoing debate over the federal response to January 6, raising fresh questions about accountability and transparency at the highest levels of government.
Given the D.C. National Guard’s history of success supporting both the Federal Government and the City Government in responding to civil unrest, and the significant role the Guard played in ensuring the safety and security of Members of Congress at the Capitol on January 6, it is essential that Report No. 2022-039 accurately reflect objective facts so that we can identify the serious problems, abuses, and deficiencies to recommend corrective actions consistent with the Inspector General Act of 19782.
Throughout the Subcommittee’s extensive investigation into the failures of January 6, 2021, we have discovered numerous flaws and objective inaccuracies in the report that your office has yet to appropriately address.
After a thorough examination of e-mails and documents, including letters, memorandums, agreements, plans, orders, reports, briefings, statements made in congressional hearings, closeddoor testimony to the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol (“Select Committee”), and closed-door testimony made to the DoD IG, the Subcommittee’s investigation has concluded that the Department of Defense intentionally delayed the deployment of the DCNG to the Capitol on January 6, 2021. Furthermore, the Subcommittee also maintains that the DoD IG knowingly concealed the extent of the delay in constructing a narrative that is favorable to DoD and Pentagon leadership. …
In March of 2021, D.C. National Guard Major General William Walker testified before Congress that the Guard’s response to the Capitol on January 6 was delayed by senior DoD officials.
In April of 2024, Colonel Earl Matthews, Major General Walker’s legal advisor, Command Sergeant Major Michael Brooks, Major General Walker’s Senior Enlisted Officer, Brigadier General Aarond Dean, Major General Walker’s Adjutant General, and Captain Timothy Nick, Major General Walker’s Aide-De-Camp, testified before Congress that the Secretary of the Army, Ryan McCarthy, was not in communication with the Guard and that their response to the Capitol was “most certainly delayed [by the Army].” These key DCNG personnel were intentionally not included as witnesses by the DoD IG.
The Subcommittee is deeply concerned that the DoD IG’s failure to interview witnesses who testify to an account of events on January 6 which are contradictory to the report’s conclusions, erode any suggestion that this report is correct or unbiased. …
A report that includes biased and incomplete statements to favor the Department of Defense and U.S. Army while disparaging the D.C. National Guard fails to represent the DoD IG’s philosophy and practice of producing unbiased, objective, impartial, and independent reviews as well as recommendations grounded in evidence and free from external influence.
Therefore, we are left with no choice but to reject Report No. 2022-039 and request that you publish a formal correction on behalf of the 10,432 congressional staff members and 535 Members of Congress who donned gas masks and retreated from their Chambers while the DCNG sat on buses waiting, less than 2 miles from the Capitol at the D.C. Armory, for communication from Secretary Ryan McCarthy.
“My Subcommittee worked with the DoD IG in good faith throughout our investigation to provide multiple opportunities for the DOD IG to produce corroborating materials or evidence to support their conclusions,” said Chairman Loudermilk in a statement.
“Unfortunately, the DoD IG continues to promote an inaccurate narrative that protects senior Pentagon officials and attempts to cast fault on the D.C. National Guard, who were ready and waiting less than 2 miles from the Capitol but unable to respond on January 6 due to lack of communication from the Secretary of the Army,” he added.
He continued, “My Subcommittee released transcripts that show that not only were political concerns of ‘optics’ at play, but that DoD officials continued to delay as the riot at the Capitol worsened. The evidence is conclusive: DoD officials misled Congress into believing that help was ‘on the way’ with full knowledge that it wasn’t.”
The letter also reveals a shocking claim that thousands of National Guard personnel were ready and equipped to respond yet were left waiting for orders due to “unnecessary bureaucracy and mismanagement.”
The Subcommittee is demanding a formal correction to the report and insists the Pentagon disclose all evidence related to January 6. It has also sought guidance from the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency to ensure accurate historical records.
Trump Makes Ambassador Picks for Three Major Countries
By Noah Stanton
Donald Trump is one month away from taking office for a second time. Over the past few weeks, he’s been tirelessly working to put together the best administration possible.
Since winning the election, Trump has put together quite a group to help him make America great again. On Tuesday night, Trump announced three ambassador picks that are sure to raise some liberal eyebrows.
First, Trump nominated Kimberly Guilfoyle to serve as the United States Ambassador to Greece. He did so in a brief statement in which he praised the former Fox News host.
From Daily Wire: “For many years, Kimberly has been a close friend and ally,” Trump said. “Her extensive experience and leadership in law, media, and politics along with her sharp intellect make her supremely qualified to represent the United States, and safeguard its interests abroad.”
He added, “Kimberly is perfectly suited to foster strong bilateral relations with Greece, advancing our interests on issues ranging from defense cooperation to trade and economic innovation.”
Guilfoyle was apparently overjoyed in accepting Trump’s appointment.
“President Trump’s historic victory is bringing hope and optimism to the American people and to freedom-loving allies across the world,” she said. “It was the democratic values born in Greece that helped shape the founding of America.”
“And now, we have an opportunity to honor that history by bringing better days here at home and abroad,” she continued. “As ambassador, I look forward to delivering on the Trump agenda, supporting our Greek allies, and ushering in a new era of peace and prosperity.”
Guilfoyle spent years working as a Fox News host. She left the network in 2018 after she began dating Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., who she is currently engaged to. Surprisingly, Guilfoyle was previously married to California Governor Gavin Newsom (D) from 2001 until 2006.
Guilfoyle actively campaigned for Trump over the past few months. She also spoke at the Republican convention in July. On the night of the election, Guilfoyle appeared onstage with the Trump family.
More Ambassador Picks From Trump
Trump additionally announced his ambassador picks for Turkey and Mexico. Private equity real estate investor Tom Barrack will be Trump’s nominee for U.S. ambassador to Turkey.
“For three decades, Tom successfully managed a global private equity firm,” Trump said. “He is a well respected and experienced voice of reason to a wide range of thought leaders in both political and business circles.”
Finally, Trump nominated Ronald Johnson to serve in his second term as the U.S. Ambassador to Mexico. During Trump’s first presidency, Johnson served as the ambassador to El Salvador. Trump made it clear that Johnson will be assisting in his crackdown on border security between the U.S. and Mexico.
“Ron will work closely with our great Secretary of State Nominee, Marco Rubio, to promote our Nation’s security and prosperity through strong America First Foreign Policies,” Trump said. “He also served our Country for over twenty years with the Central Intelligence Agency after a distinguished career in the U.S. Army as a Green Beret.”
It certainly seems like Guilfoyle, Barrack, and Johnson are all solid picks for their ambassador roles. We can’t wait to see them get to work in helping Trump make America great again!
More information needed as to what is the money going to be used for?
HUMOR!
Due to Biden’s mental status – he is incapable of making decisions at this moment; therefore, the above transaction is cancelled until further notice due to lack of use information needed.
“No Funds for Iranian Terrorism Act,” due to lack of use information.
The Biden administration has once again reauthorized a contentious sanctions waiver that unlocks upwards of $10 billion in frozen funds for Iran. This decision, revealed in a notice submitted to Congress late Wednesday, has sparked intense debate on Capitol Hill, especially among Republican lawmakers.
The waiver permits Iraq to transfer electricity payments to Iran via third-party countries, a practice the Biden administration initially approved in November. With the previous waiver set to expire, the renewal ensures continued financial transactions between Iraq and Iran. The funds, denominated in dinars, can now be converted into euros and deposited into Iranian bank accounts in Oman. The State Department argues this measure is essential for Iraq to maintain its energy supply while transitioning to energy self-sufficiency. Critics, however, contend that the waiver indirectly supports Iran’s controversial activities, including its sponsorship of terrorism.
GOP leaders in Congress have been vocal in their disapproval. Republican lawmakers and foreign policy experts argue that the Biden administration’s actions contradict broader U.S. foreign policy objectives. They emphasize Iran’s ongoing support for Hamas, other proxy groups, and attacks on American outposts in the Middle East.
Representative Bill Huizenga (R-Mich.) and three other Republican colleagues wrote to the Biden administration earlier this week, warning about the potential misuse of the funds. “By waiving the application of sanctions, the Administration is maintaining a financial lifeline for the Iranian regime, even as it continues to support terrorist organizations around the world,” their letter stated.
The lawmakers also highlighted Iran’s history of bypassing humanitarian restrictions, suggesting that these funds could inadvertently support nuclear activities, terrorist proxies, and military operations.
Richard Goldberg, a former White House National Security Council member, called the latest waiver significantly different from those issued under the Trump administration. According to Goldberg, the updated waiver provides Iran with more flexibility in using the funds. “This is not the same waiver for Iraqi electricity imports that has been issued since 2018,” he explained. “The Biden version gives Tehran access to money for budget support, debt payments, and import subsidies.”
Goldberg further alleged that the administration’s lack of transparency regarding how much money Iran has accessed in recent months raises questions about U.S. oversight. He linked the funds to recent incidents, including attacks on American soldiers and naval forces, and urged Congress to pass the “No Funds for Iranian Terrorism Act,” legislation aimed at cutting off Iran’s access to these funds.
The State Department, however, stands by the waiver, emphasizing its importance for Iraq’s stability and energy security. A spokesperson stated, “Since 2018, the waiver has remained necessary as Iraq weans itself off Iranian energy imports, which cannot happen overnight.” According to the department, Iraq has made significant progress by developing regional electricity interconnections, capturing natural gas, and exploring domestic energy resources.
Regarding concerns about fund misuse, the State Department insists that the money remains restricted to humanitarian purposes. “These funds can only be used for transactions involving food, agricultural commodities, medicine, medical devices, and other non-sanctionable items,” the spokesperson said. “The money goes straight to trusted vendors or financial institutions in other countries and never directly enters Iran.”
Despite these assurances, skeptics argue that money is inherently fungible. By freeing up $10 billion for limited uses, Iran’s government may redirect other financial resources toward its military and geopolitical ambitions.
The renewed waiver reflects the Biden administration’s balancing act between maintaining Iraq’s energy needs and countering Iran’s destabilizing activities. Iraq’s dependence on Iranian energy imports remains a pressing issue, but critics contend that the waiver indirectly funds activities harmful to U.S. interests and allies.
Republican opposition to the waiver is likely to grow as Iran’s regional influence expands. With GOP lawmakers citing Iran’s history of deception and its alleged links to recent attacks on American forces, the administration faces increasing pressure to reconsider its stance. Calls for legislative action, such as the proposed “No Funds for Iranian Terrorism Act,” signal a potential showdown in Congress over future sanctions policy.
As the debate unfolds, questions about U.S. oversight, Iran’s compliance with restrictions, and the waiver’s impact on regional stability will remain central to the discourse. Whether the Biden administration’s approach ultimately achieves its intended balance or exacerbates existing tensions is yet to be seen.
The Biden administration has once again reauthorized a contentious sanctions waiver that unlocks upwards of $10 billion in frozen funds for Iran. This decision, revealed in a notice submitted to Congress late Wednesday, has sparked intense debate on Capitol Hill, especially among Republican lawmakers.
The waiver permits Iraq to transfer electricity payments to Iran via third-party countries, a practice the Biden administration initially approved in November. With the previous waiver set to expire, the renewal ensures continued financial transactions between Iraq and Iran. The funds, denominated in dinars, can now be converted into euros and deposited into Iranian bank accounts in Oman. The State Department argues this measure is essential for Iraq to maintain its energy supply while transitioning to energy self-sufficiency. Critics, however, contend that the waiver indirectly supports Iran’s controversial activities, including its sponsorship of terrorism.
GOP leaders in Congress have been vocal in their disapproval. Republican lawmakers and foreign policy experts argue that the Biden administration’s actions contradict broader U.S. foreign policy objectives. They emphasize Iran’s ongoing support for Hamas, other proxy groups, and attacks on American outposts in the Middle East.
Representative Bill Huizenga (R-Mich.) and three other Republican colleagues wrote to the Biden administration earlier this week, warning about the potential misuse of the funds. “By waiving the application of sanctions, the Administration is maintaining a financial lifeline for the Iranian regime, even as it continues to support terrorist organizations around the world,” their letter stated.
The lawmakers also highlighted Iran’s history of bypassing humanitarian restrictions, suggesting that these funds could inadvertently support nuclear activities, terrorist proxies, and military operations.
Richard Goldberg, a former White House National Security Council member, called the latest waiver significantly different from those issued under the Trump administration. According to Goldberg, the updated waiver provides Iran with more flexibility in using the funds. “This is not the same waiver for Iraqi electricity imports that has been issued since 2018,” he explained. “The Biden version gives Tehran access to money for budget support, debt payments, and import subsidies.”
Goldberg further alleged that the administration’s lack of transparency regarding how much money Iran has accessed in recent months raises questions about U.S. oversight. He linked the funds to recent incidents, including attacks on American soldiers and naval forces, and urged Congress to pass the “No Funds for Iranian Terrorism Act,” legislation aimed at cutting off Iran’s access to these funds.
The State Department, however, stands by the waiver, emphasizing its importance for Iraq’s stability and energy security. A spokesperson stated, “Since 2018, the waiver has remained necessary as Iraq weans itself off Iranian energy imports, which cannot happen overnight.” According to the department, Iraq has made significant progress by developing regional electricity interconnections, capturing natural gas, and exploring domestic energy resources.
Regarding concerns about fund misuse, the State Department insists that the money remains restricted to humanitarian purposes. “These funds can only be used for transactions involving food, agricultural commodities, medicine, medical devices, and other non-sanctionable items,” the spokesperson said. “The money goes straight to trusted vendors or financial institutions in other countries and never directly enters Iran.”
Despite these assurances, skeptics argue that money is inherently fungible. By freeing up $10 billion for limited uses, Iran’s government may redirect other financial resources toward its military and geopolitical ambitions.
The renewed waiver reflects the Biden administration’s balancing act between maintaining Iraq’s energy needs and countering Iran’s destabilizing activities. Iraq’s dependence on Iranian energy imports remains a pressing issue, but critics contend that the waiver indirectly funds activities harmful to U.S. interests and allies.
Republican opposition to the waiver is likely to grow as Iran’s regional influence expands. With GOP lawmakers citing Iran’s history of deception and its alleged links to recent attacks on American forces, the administration faces increasing pressure to reconsider its stance. Calls for legislative action, such as the proposed “No Funds for Iranian Terrorism Act,” signal a potential showdown in Congress over future sanctions policy.
As the debate unfolds, questions about U.S. oversight, Iran’s compliance with restrictions, and the waiver’s impact on regional stability will remain central to the discourse. Whether the Biden administration’s approach ultimately achieves its intended balance or exacerbates existing tensions is yet to be seen.
Click to unmute
kommonsentsjane 