Navarro Defends Menendez, Blames Wife, Argues ‘Costco Sells Gold Bars’

Faux-conservative ABC News co-host Ana Navarro was back to defending her close friend Democratic Senator Bob Menendez (NJ) from credible allegations of corruption on Friday’s edition of The View. Despite insisting she doesn’t “excuse him,” she was quite busy blaming Menendez’s wife for getting him into the situation that he was in, and seemingly tried to suggest he might have bought the gold bars hidden in his suit pockets at Costco. She also praised Democratic senators for not forcing him out of office. At least Navarro started off by acknowledging she was not going to be operating with honesty and good faith on the issue. “And look, and every time we talk about this I always want to start by saying, I think I'm biased. I try to be objective but I've known Bob Menendez for almost 30 years. I’ve worked with him on countless issues, Cuba, Nicaragua, immigration, Central American free trade,” she admitted. She immediately followed up by going after the credible allegations against him. “This Menendez that I read about here just does not jive, does not square away with the man I've known for all of this time. It's hard for me to understand all of these facts,” she decried. One might argue that she admitted to possibly facilitating some of Menendez’s alleged corruption when she bragged: “I’ve went to him with 100 issues with very rich clients, he never ever did anything like this.”     Throughout the segment, Navarro tried to blame Menendez’s wife and argued that she and his other friends didn’t know who the woman was before he married her: NAVARRO: And I will say this last thing, a lot of his friends, including me, when he saw this case, thought this is not the Bob we know. Who is this woman and how has this happened? I mean, she suddenly showed up like in the middle of COVID saying that she didn't know he was a senator. SARA HAINES: At IHOP. NAVARRO: At an IHOP. “And I did tell you the first time I read about this case, I think this woman -- I think Bob was completely smitten, enamored. He was a lone wolf for a long time. This happened during COVID,” she defended him. Navarro went on to praise Democratic senators for not forcing her friend out of office, citing the “reservoir of goodwill” Menendez had with them: And I think part of the reason that he hasn't been made to resign, that Schumer haven't forced it, his colleagues haven't forced it, is because there is a reservoir of goodwill towards him and respect towards him that there wasn’t toward like a George Santos, for example. And also I think it's because he's up for re-election now this November. And so, it's not like he's got another four years to serve, right? And the case is coming up -- is coming up now. On the flip side, she lashed out at Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman (D) for daring to demand her friend resign. “The difference with John Fetterman is that John Fetterman is new in the Senate. And so, he probably doesn't have the collegiality and friendship and history with Menendez that most of the others do,” she chided. Near the end of the segment, Navarro inexplicably proclaimed: “I read that Costco sells gold bars and they're sold out.” It was unclear if she was suggesting that Menendez bought the gold bars at Costco or that gold bars were readily available thus it didn’t matter. Costco does not sell the 1-kilo bricks stamped “Swiss Bank Corporation” that Menendez squirreled away. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View April 19, 2024 11:03:27 a.m. Eastern (…) ANA NAVARRO: His trial begins in a couple of weeks, I think, in two or three weeks. And look, and every time we talk about this I always want to start by saying, I think I'm biased. I try to be objective but I've known Bob Menendez for almost 30 years. I’ve worked with him on countless issues, Cuba, Nicaragua, immigration, Central American free trade. This Menendez that I read about here just does not jive, does not square away with the man I've known for all of this time. It's hard for me to understand all of these facts. I’ve went to him with 100 issues with very rich clients, he never ever did anything like this. And I will say this, and I don't excuse him, I don't justify him because Bob is one of the smartest people in Congress. It is a low bar but he really is one of the smartest people that I know, that I've worked with Congress. I think there needs to be more regulation of family members lobbying because it's not just Bob Menendez's wife, it's siblings, it's spouses, it's all of this thing. And they do have an advantage that other people don't have and a lot of lobbying firms have them on the firm and they don't even work. They don't even show up. It’s just have the names. The people of New Jersey are going to have a say on this. Bob has not said if he’s running again? JOY BEHAR: Is he running again? NAVARRO: He's not running as a Democrat. He hasn't said if he's running as an independent. And I will say this last thing, a lot of his friends, including me, when he saw this case, thought this is not the Bob we know. Who is this woman and how has this happened? I mean, she suddenly showed up like in the middle of COVID saying that she didn't know he was a senator. SARA HAINES: At IHOP. NAVARRO: At an IHOP. (…) 11:07:06 a.m. Eastern ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: He’d been charged previously and he did get off. HAINES: In 2015. FARAH GRIFFIN: He already had very similar charges that he was able to get by before he ever met the woman, so the fact that similar activity is taking place -- HAINES: She needs to be there too. NAVARRO (interrupting): I’m actually very familiar with that first case. I knew both of them. I knew Dr. Melden because he was always with Bob. And, I mean, Bob’s a guy who's been in my house. I've been at his mom's funeral. I know him very well. And I think part of the reason that he hasn't been made to resign, that Schumer haven't forced it, his colleagues haven't forced it, is because there is a reservoir of goodwill towards him and respect towards him that there wasn’t toward like a George Santos, for example. And also I think it's because he's up for re-election now this November. And so, it's not like he's got another four years to serve, right? And the case is coming up -- is coming up now. This case to me feels different than the first case. And I did tell you the first time I read about this case, I think this woman -- I think Bob was completely smitten, enamored. He was a lone wolf for a long time. This happened during COVID. Again, I don't excuse him. He is a smart guy. He should have known better. He's not something stupid gullible ingenue. SUNNY HOSTIN: The gold bars are a giveaway, right? [Crosstalk] HAINES: First time, shame on you; second time it's shame on me. In 2015, there was a close enough trial. If he’s coming back knowing, “Oh my gosh, I almost got caught” and he is so smart, dabbling in what he is dabbling in is dangerous and almost felt like he feels he was above it. NAVARRO: It seems to me gold bars for a gold digger. FARAH GRIFFIN: There are Democratic senator who’ve called for his resignation. HAINES: Fetterman. FARAH GRIFFIN: Including John Fetterman. So, I think the senator who served multiple times should stand on his own two feet, not blame the woman. NAVARRO: The difference with John Fetterman is that John Fetterman is new in the Senate. And so, he probably doesn't have the collegiality and friendship and history with Menendez that most of the others do. FARAH GRIFFIN: But that often blinds judgment. HAINES: Gold bars and you’re hiding them in your suit pockets and you’re giving your wife a car and they have text messages. I’d say, collegiality aside, you've crossed over. FARAH GRIFFIN: That's where the good old boys club gets in the way. It’s like, “oh, we like him. He’s such a such a nice guy.” Well, if he's committing crimes it doesn't really matter. NAVARRO: Which is why I tell you I feel like I know that I'm biased. I like the guy and I keep hoping against hope there is some reasonable explanation. I hope -- Listen, I hope the truth comes out. You know, I read -- I read that Costco sells gold bars and they're sold out. HOSTIN: Really?! NAVARRO: Yes! HAINES: You can buy gold bars? HOSTIN: I don't know about some gold bars from Costco. (…)

ABC News Refuses to Ask Granholm About Corruption Allegations, Ties to EV Companies

Earlier this week, Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm was grilled in a Senate hearing about allegations of corruption after it was discovered that she had financial ties to some of the very electric vehicle companies she was tasked with regulating and forcing Americans to eventually buy. But none of that was addressed by ABC News in an interview conducted by The View cast on Thursday. Instead, America was treated to questions about how energy companies read meters, how stupid Trump voters were, and when she was running for president. The first question out of the gate came from co-host Sara Haines, which only served to promote next week’s Earth Day celebrations and to give Granholm the opportunity to lecture about how to shrink their “carbon footprint”: And as we're all gearing up to celebrate Earth Day, from your perspective, what is the single most important thing people watching – watching this right now can do to fight climate change and reduce or lower our own carbon footprint? Granholm also used the question to promote the electric vehicles she had a financial stake in, before divesting in response to conservative media scrutiny and an ethics complaint being filed. At no point did she receive any questions – let alone serious ones – about her financial ties or allegations of corruption and ethics violation. Instead, moderator Whoopi Goldberg asked about EVs in “the projects” and people without homes to charge them.     Goldberg also wanted Granholm to explain how her electricity company can read her meter: People are getting … electric bills that are insane and I don't understand how you can – Because I watch these guys. And they come and look at the little thing going around then they read the number. How do you know $300 is on there? How do you know to charge me that? Faux-conservative Alyssa Farah Griffin was as useless as ever since she didn’t grill Granholm either. Instead, she teed up the Secretary to blame the rise in gas prices on something other than President Biden. “Gas prices. They’re are somewhat on the rise, but they did go down significantly…What is the administration doing to lower those prices, and should we be worried about the conflict in the Middle East contributing?” she clownishly wondered. For her part, co-host Joy Behar proclaimed President Biden “cares about his grandchildren” because he was “working very hard” to stop climate change, while former President Trump “couldn’t care less about his grandchildren” because he wanted to “drill, drill, drill” and pointed out that off-shore wind turbines were harming whales. She panicked that “a new Washington Post poll shows that nearly half of Republicans now believe Trump that climate change is a hoax,” and wanted Granholm to answer: “How do we convince these people to start believing the truth?!” Behar also asked one of the final questions, pushing Granholm to run for president. “Jennifer, when are you going to run for president?” she quipped. The View’s refusal to hold Granholm to account was important to call out because the show is under the ABC News umbrella. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View April 18, 2024 11:32:45 a.m. Eastern WHOOPI GOLDBERG: Welcome back. Our ABC news series, The Power of Us: People, Climate, and Our Future is kicking off just in time for next week's Earth Day and joining us now to weigh in on hot topics from rising temperatures and gas prices to how we can all do our part to save the planet, please welcome U.S. Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm. [Applause] SECY. JENNIFER GRANHOLM (Department of Energy): Thank you so much. GOLDBERG: Welcome. Sara. SARA HAINES: Madam secretary, thanks for joining us. GRANHOLM: Yes, of course. HAINES: And as we're all gearing up to celebrate Earth Day, from your perspective, what is the single most important thing people watching – watching this right now can do to fight climate change and reduce or lower our own carbon footprint? (…) 11:35:02 a.m. Eastern GOLDBERG: What if you live in the projects? What if you don't have a home, what do you – (…) 11:36:48 a.m. Eastern BEHAR: Okay, so while President Biden who cares about his grandchildren – GRANHOLM: Yes. BEHAR: -- is working very hard on this as you just pointed out, he has record climate investments, former president -- can't even say it, former p – p – p[resident] Trump he says he would be a dictator on day one and drill, drill, drill! You know, he couldn't care less about his grandchildren and he spreads conspiracy theories that wind turbines are killing whales and causing cancer. But here's the problem that makes me nuts. A new Washington Post poll shows that nearly half of Republicans now believe Trump that climate change is a hoax. How much more evidence do these people need when they see what goes on with hurricanes, et cetera, how do we convince these people to start believing the truth?! (…) 11:39:47 a.m. Eastern GRANHOLM: Whoopi, you don’t look convinced. GOLDBERG: I am convinced but I do have questions, because people are getting bills, energy bills. HOSTIN: Electric bills. GOLDBERG: Electric bills that are insane and I don't understand how you can – Because I watch these guys. And they come and look at the little thing going around then they read the number. How do you know $300 is on there? [Laughter] How do you know to charge me that? HOSTIN: Good point! (…) 11:40:10 a.m. Eastern ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: More specifically, I did want to ask, Madam Secretary, gas prices. They’re are somewhat on the rise, but they did go down significantly. We’re seeing them rise a bit. Former White House Chief of Staff Ron Klain had encouraged the President to focus on pocketbook issues to voters. What is the administration doing to lower those prices, and should we be worried about the conflict in the Middle East contributing? GRANHOLM: Yeah, we should and thank you for raising that. (…) 11:41:22 a.m. Eastern BEHAR: Jennifer, when are you going to run for president? GRANHOLM: Oh, my lord. What were you saying? HOSTIN: Shouldn't gas companies be better corporate citizens and lower the prices and stop gouging the American people?! (…)

'They're the Commies!' ABC News Claims GOP 'In the Bed' With Russia

On Thursday, ABC News moderators Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar took to The View to spew disinformation about Republicans on national television during an election year. The lies included accusations of being “afraid of history,” being communist and “in the bed” with Russia, and wanting to make women property again. Goldberg lashed out at “these little snowflaky people” and, without evidence, accused them of being “the ones that are afraid of information. They're the ones who are afraid of history.” “It's not us,” she sneered. “It's y'all. Y'all are afraid that what's happening is happening without you and it shouldn't be, but you're letting it happen. You're letting all of these decisions be made without you being taken seriously! No one is taking you people seriously! And you should be worried about it.” She was followed up by Behar, who seemingly longed for the return of the House Un-American Activities Committee of the Cold War era to “ruin” the lives of ALL Republicans by having them “blacklisted” from society: BEHAR: Why are they in the bed with the Russians? I mean, we grew up in a time when if you were pro-Russian in any way you were hauled before the UAC Committee and your life was ruined and you were blacklisted. Now all of a sudden these people are all about the Russians. HOSTIN: Trump. BEHAR: I know, but why are Americans accepting that all of a sudden?     “They call the Democrats commies, they’re the commies!” she decried. As usual, faux-conservative Alyssa Farah Griffin was absolutely useless and refused to push back on any of the false accusations her friends were leveling without evidence. Further, Goldberg asserted it was “hard to figure [Republicans] out” and suggested “they’ve forgotten that we, the people, make the decisions about what goes on in this country” as if Republicans were not elected by the people. Without evidence, Goldberg went on to insist that Republicans were trying to turn back the clock to make women property again: I was listening to a book today, just talking about women's rights in the early part of this century, and, you know, women could do nothing. You had to be married or you didn't exist. Why would you want to go back to that? Why are we allowing -- This is the thing, I don't understand why we didn't get angrier sooner – and I know people are angry now because I hear it – but why are we going backwards in a way that is not good for the economy, it's not good for the country? What made Goldberg’s claim even more ridiculous, was that she said she was learning about women’s rights “in the early part of this century.” We’re almost a quarter of the through the 21st century, which meant she was living in the past and didn’t know what century it was. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View April 18, 2024 11:07:20 a.m. Eastern (…) WHOOPI GOLDBERG: You know what's offensive to me? SUNNY HOSTIN: What, Whoopi? GOLDBERG: I don't – These little snowflaky people, they're the people who said, you know, ‘Oh, you can't take it, huh? You can't take the heat?’ I'm discovering that most of the folks on the other side are the snowflakes, they're the ones that are afraid of information. They're the ones who are afraid of history. It's not us. It's y'all. Y'all are afraid that what's happening is happening without you and it shouldn't be, but you're letting it happen. You're letting all of these decisions be made without you being taken seriously! No one is taking you people seriously! And you should be worried about it. JOY BEHAR: Why are they in the bed with the Russians? I mean, we grew up in a time when if you were pro-Russian in any way you were hauled before the UAC Committee and your life was ruined and you were blacklisted. Now all of a sudden these people are all about the Russians. HOSTIN: Trump. BEHAR: I know, but why are Americans accepting that all of a sudden? They call the Democrats commies, they’re the commies! (…) 11:08:50 a.m. Eastern GOLDBERG: You know why it's so hard to figure the other side out? Because they’ve forgotten that we, the people, make the decisions about what goes on in this country. And every time they try to usurp it – You know. I was listening to a book today, just talking about women's rights in the early part of this century, and, you know, women could do nothing. You had to be married or you didn't exist. Why would you want to go back to that? Why are we allowing -- This is the thing, I don't understand why we didn't get angrier sooner – and I know people are angry now because I hear it – but why are we going backwards in a way that is not good for the economy, it's not good for the country? (…)

NewsGuard Maintains NPR’s Perfect Rating Despite Berliner's Suspension, Resignation

Last week, now-former NPR business editor Uri Berliner drew the ire of the station’s new, far-left CEO after he called out NPR for allowing the liberal worldview to dominate the newsroom. Berliner’s act of journalistic integrity ultimately cost him his job; he was suspended and ultimately resigned. But despite NPR’s retaliation against a whistleblower and others coming forward to corroborate Berliner’s claims, left-wing media rating organization NewsGuard maintained NPR’s perfect 100/100 rating. In his essay for The Free Press, Berliner exposed NPR as a factory churning out content that catered to the liberal worldview: “There’s an unspoken consensus about the stories we should pursue and how they should be framed. It’s frictionless—one story after another about instances of supposed racism, transphobia, signs of the climate apocalypse, Israel doing something bad, and the dire threat of Republican policies. It’s almost like an assembly line.” Earlier this week, Berliner was suspended without pay by the station under the guise of it being punishment for publishing something with another outlet without getting permission first (as if NPR would have allowed him to publish something critical out them to begin with). NPR did give permission for Morning Edition host Steve Inskeep to publish a Substack defending the station and attacking his long-time colleague. Berliner subsequently resigned; posting his resignation letter on X. “I am resigning from NPR, a great American institution where I have worked for 25 years,” he wrote. “I don’t support calls to defund NPR. I respect the integrity of my colleagues and wish for NPR to thrive and do important journalism. But I cannot work in a newsroom where I am disparaged by a new CEO whose divisive views confirm the very problems at NPR I cite in my Free Press essay.”   My resignation letter to NPR CEO @krmaher pic.twitter.com/0hafVbcZAK — Uri Berliner (@uberliner) April 17, 2024   Despite NPR seeking retribution against one of their journalists for publically blowing the whistle on how they were allowing their liberal bias to poison their newsroom, thus forcing said journalist to publically resign, NewsGuard has so far maintained NPR’s perfect 100/100 rating. Berliner’s criticisms of NPR weren’t business or employment-related (such as pay or working conditions) and had everything to do with the politics influencing the news product the organization was putting out. And thus, was an issue NewsGuard should’ve been taking seriously, especially considering that Berliner was getting support from other former NPR staffers. At this point, a lack of action by NewsGuard to downgrade NPR’s score appeared to be in defiance of the facts and in opposition to the support Berliner was receiving from many right-wingers. As MRC Associate Editor for Business & Free Speech America Joseph Vazquez noted in the 2023 study of NewsGuard’s rankings, the point of the whole system was for it to be used as a “cudgel” against right-leaning news organizations: NewsGuard wields its ratings as a cudgel, attempting to scare away advertisers from doing business with media and organizations that have been accused of promoting so-called “misinformation” or wrongthink on a whole host of issues like abortion, climate change, COVID-19 and elections. In so doing, NewsGuard effectively strips media outlets with which it disagrees of their ad money, slowly bleeding out their coffers. NewsGuard can reluctantly downgrade legacy liberal media outlets when they have terrible reporting held up under their nose. They recently downgraded The New York Times after the Media Research Center called them out multiple times. They need to do the same now with NPR.

‘Wonderfully Poetic’: Joy Reid Cheers 'My DEIs' for Prosecuting Trump

Elements of the liberal media don’t see the lawsuits and trials against former President Trump as just tools to score wins for their electoral politics, they also see them as tools to score wins for their racial politics as well. MSNBC host Joy Reid made that abundantly clear during the network’s Monday lovefest for the hush money trial in New York when she praised “my DEIs” for bringing so many charges against the former President. Delving into her usual race-baiting, Reid described it as “wonderfully poetic” that black people were prosecuting Trump. Without evidence, she suggested that it would upset Trump and his inner circle because they supposedly didn’t want black people going to law school: But for me, there is something wonderfully poetic about the fact that despite the fact that even if convicted, he's not going to go to prison. The first person to actually criminally prosecute Donald Trump is a black Harvard grad. The very kind of person that his former staff, the people who worked for him, Steven Miller et cetera, want to never be at Harvard Law School. But he was. And he came out and graduated and he's prosecuting you, Donald. “And a black woman is doing the same exact thing in Georgia,” she boasted. “And a black woman forced you to pay a $175 million fine that's out now also in question because the people who put it up, that might not be legit.”     Reid was absolutely giddy that “Donald Trump is being held to account by the very multicultural, multiracial democracy that he's trying to dismantle.” She added that “there's something poetic and actually wonderful about that” and said it was proof of “something good about our country that we're still capable of having that happen.” “Go, DEI! My DEIs are bringing it home on today!” she cheered, referring to left-wing diversity, equity, and inclusion programs. Just before lauding Trump’s prosecutors for their skin color, she compared Trump to one of his lawyer’s former clients, a mob boss: But to the point that you all were just making, I mean, one of my favorite facts about one of Donald Trump's lawyers, Susan Necheles, is that one of her former clients was the notorious New York mobster Benny Eggs. And I will just assume and presume that old Benny Eggs was not attacking the judge. So, Donald Trump is at this point outdoing actual mobsters in his attacks on the judge's family, the daughter. And he's doing it to the point that Lawrence made. “He knows he will never spend a day, a second, a moment in prison,” she decried. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: MSNBC’s Trump on Trial: New York v. Donald Trump April 15, 2024 7:44:32 p.m. Eastern (…) JOY REID: But to the point that you all were just making, I mean, one of my favorite facts about one of Donald Trump's lawyers, Susan Necheles, is that one of her former clients was the notorious New York mobster Benny Eggs. And I will just assume and presume that old Benny Eggs was not attacking the judge. So, Donald Trump is at this point outdoing actual mobsters in his attacks on the judge's family, the daughter. And he's doing it to the point that Lawrence made. He knows he will never spend a day, a second, a moment in prison. But for me, there is something wonderfully poetic about the fact that despite the fact that even if convicted, he's not going to go to prison. The first person to actually criminally prosecute Donald Trump is a black Harvard grad. The very kind of person that his former staff, the people who worked for him, Steven Miller et cetera, want to never be at Harvard Law School. But he was. And he came out and graduated and he's prosecuting you, Donald. And a black woman is doing the same exact thing in Georgia. And a black woman forced you to pay a $175 million fine that's out now also in question because the people who put it up, that might not be legit. Donald Trump is being held to account by the very multicultural, multiracial democracy that he's trying to dismantle. And for me, there's something poetic and actually wonderful about that. It says something good about our country that we're still capable of having that happen. Go, DEI! My DEIs are bringing it home on today. (…)

CBS Admits Legalizing Weed Doesn’t Stop Black Market Sales, Boosts Them

One of the major talking points the left and the liberal media used to sell Americans on legalizing marijuana was that it would eliminate black market operations. But in a Tuesday report, CBS Mornings admitted that Maine’s weed legalization had not stopped possibly hundreds of illegal grow houses from sprouting up all across rural parts of the state. They also reported that China was behind most of them. Co-anchor Tony Dokoupil opened the segment by boasting that weed was “legal for recreational use in 24 states plus Washington, D.C.” But he admitted that “that does not mean illegal growing operations have gone away. In fact, they're still booming.” Teeing up the investigative report by correspondent Nicole Sganga, Dokoupil noted that illegal “operations are expanding, particularly in rural parts of the U.S., and they're surprising backers overseas who are tied to other deadlier drugs including fentanyl.” Sganga’s report focused on the liberal state of Maine, which legalized weed but was seeing a disturbing surge in the number of illegal growing operations being funded by China. She spoke with Ray Donovan, a former chief of operations for the Drug Enforcement Agency, who explained the situation with Chinese organized crime: SGANGA: Just one flashpoint in a billion-dollar black market marijuana boom now sinking its teeth into less populated states like Oklahoma, Colorado, and Maine. DONOVAN: If I can go into Maine and buy a house for cheap that's rural, is very isolated. (…) SGANGA: But perhaps more shocking than the budding number of illegal grows: who is behind them. DONOVAN: By and large, we see Chinese organized crime behind black-market marijuana.     There was apparently one grow house that was staffed with men who were human trafficked from China to tend to the plants while being trapped in the house. One of the apparent takeaways CBS wanted viewers to have was that legal marijuana was still viable, there just needed to be an investment in enough law enforcement to crack down on the black market: SGANGA: Marijuana remains illegal under federal law, but a majority of Americans now live in a state that has legalized weed. With some states still limiting cultivation and others imposing steep taxes, the marijuana underworld thrives. DONOVAN: It is not something that's going to go away, especially if you are investing in legal marijuana statewide, then we're going to have to pursue the black market marijuana organizations. While arguing that “people were tired of the war on drugs,” he admitted that “counterintuitively, when you legalize you actually need a big, strong law enforcement push in order to push the black market into the legal market, because people don't naturally want to volunteer to pay taxes, get regulated, fill out paperwork and forms.” Cracking down on crime? What a novel idea! Destroying the serious nature of the problem, they ended the segment with co-host Gayle King proclaiming, “I just want to try it one time before I die. Co-hosts Dokoupil and Vladimir Duthiers seemed more than happy to oblige: DUTHIERS: We can make that happen, Gayle! Somebody around here can make that happen! KING: I’ve never tried – I just want to try it one time. DOKOUPIL: I don't want to fund the black market, but there are a lot of trucks just sitting around here in Times Square. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: CBS Mornings April 16, 2024 7:30:06 a.m. Eastern TONY DOKOUPIL: There’s a growing acceptance, of course, of marijuana use across the country. It’s legal for recreational use in 24 states plus Washington, D.C. But, that does not mean illegal growing operations have gone away. In fact, they're still booming. A CBS investigation finds those operations are expanding, particularly in rural parts of the U.S., and they're surprising backers overseas who are tied to other deadlier drugs including fentanyl. Nicole Sganga takes us now to an illicit marijuana farm in the beautiful state of Maine, which is one of the states where the drug is actually legal. [Cuts to video] NICOLE SGANGA: Nestled along Maine’s rocky shoreline, the sleepy town of Machias. CHIEF KEITH MERCIER (Machias Police Department): People lobster fish, they clam, and they log. SGANGA: Population, about 2,000, It’s sleepy. MERCIER: Sleepy, very quiet. SGANGA: But last fall, a pungent smell and a stream of vans darting to and from this barn woke up neighbors triggering a six-week investigation by local police and chief Keith Mercier, and unearthing more than $1 million in black market marijuana. MERCIER: They had irrigation systems setup, they had heating systems, humidifying system. It was quite an impressive operation. SGANGA: Hanging from the rafters, flowering under a sea of grow lights. A maze of more than 2,600 plants seized by police. How in the world did black market marijuana set up shop here? MERCIER: Well, I think that was one of the draws was being rural community, it could go undetected. SGANGA: Just one flashpoint in a billion-dollar black market marijuana boom now sinking its teeth into less populated states like Oklahoma, Colorado, and Maine. RAY DONOVAN (former DEA chief of operations): If I can go into Maine and buy a house for cheap that's rural, is very isolated. SGANGA: Ray Donovan is the former chief of operations for the DEA. DONOVAN: That would allow them to continue to grow the marijuana crops uninhibited. SGANGA: Law enforcement now cracking down, with at least 34 busts statewide. Since last June, more sites dotting the I-95 corridor now undergoing investigation. This is not just a Machias problem. MERCIER: No, this is a statewide problem. The information we have says that there is over 200 that are actively working right now. SGANGA: But perhaps more shocking than the budding number of illegal grows: who is behind them. DONOVAN: By and large, we see Chinese organized crime behind black market marijuana. SGANGA: In February, 50 lawmakers penned a bipartisan letter to Attorney General Garland demanding answers about China's role in thousands of illicit marijuana grows nationwide. SEN. SUSAN COLLINS (R-ME): They're unregulated. They’re illicit. They're destroying homes. MERCIER: Marijuana all over the place lying around. SGANGA: Operators allegedly stealing more than $10,000 in power. Just how much power was running through? MERCIER: Substantial amount. Probably four or five times what a normal house would run. STEVE ROBINSON: These locations consume huge amounts of electricity. SGANGAL So, this is the spread sheet. ROBINSON: Yes. SGANGA: Native Mainer Steve Robinson meticulously tracks suspected illegal marijuana grows statewide and took us to one identified in court records. This looks like a suburban dream home. ROBINSON: If you look on this garage right here, there's a newly installed 400-amp service. SGANGA: Purring over power records, findings published on his website, attracting the attention of lawmakers and law enforcement. Why would anyone need that much power? ROBINSON: If you’re running say, a car wash, a grocery store. SGANGA: Or? ROBINSON: Or if you're growing a lot of marijuana. SGANGA: In some cases, the suspects arrested may have been victims. MERCIER: We encountered three Asian males. They were being paid $1,000 a month to work 24-7. SGANGA: Trapped inside sparse living quarters with blacked out windows. DONOVAN: Some of the people have been brought here from China under the auspices that they’re working under a legit business. SGANGA: It sounds like you're talking about victims of human trafficking. DONOVAN: Yes. SGANGA: Marijuana remains illegal under federal law, but a majority of Americans now live in a state that has legalized weed. With some states still limiting cultivation and others imposing steep taxes, the marijuana underworld thrives. DONOVAN: It is not something that's going to go away, especially if you are investing in legal marijuana statewide, then we're going to have to pursue the black market marijuana organizations. SGANGA: You think it’s time to sound the alarm? DONOVAN: I do. [Cuts back to live] SGANGA: Donovan and other law enforcement sources told us some of the same criminal groups behind illicit weed are part of a larger criminal network tied to a deadlier drug trade: fentanyl. In fact, Donovan said the DEA first connected Chinese organized crime to these illegal weed grows by following some of the same criminals profiting off the fentanyl supply chain. Tony. DOKOUPIL: What ever to make money. Nicole, thank you very much. So, of course, one of the reasons why weed is legal in 24 states is because people were tired of the war on drugs. But, counterintuitively, when you legalize you actually need a big, strong law enforcement push in order to push the black market into the legal market, because people don't naturally want to volunteer to pay taxes, get regulated, fill out paperwork and forms. We're seeing that process play out in places like Maine. GAYLE KING: I just want to try it one time before I die. [Laughter] DOKOUPI: Well, Gayle— VLADIMIR DUTHIERS: We can make that happen, Gayle! Somebody around here can make that happen! KING: I’ve never tried – I just want to try it one time. DOKOUPIL: I don't want to fund the black market, but there are a lot of trucks just sitting around here in Times Square. KING: Okay. DUTHIERS: We're going to make that happen, Gayle. KING: It’s bucket list. Bucket list.

Hostin Fears Trump Voter Will ‘Sneak’ onto Jury By Saying ‘I Hate Trump’

On Tuesday’s edition of The View, ABC’s staunchly racist and anti-Semitic co-host, Sunny Hostin (the descendant of slave owners) proved once again why she’s a former federal prosecutor. Speaking about the upcoming hush-money trial against former President Trump, Hostin proclaimed that she feared the impartial jury would be infiltrated by a Trump supporter who would “lie” by telling the court the contradictory statement: “I hate Trump. But I can be impartial.” Hostin admitted she was “excited” for the trial, calling it “a legal nerd's Super Bowl.” When faux conservative Alyssa Farah Griffin noted “They haven’t even picked a juror,” Hostin boasted about the jurors who said they couldn’t be impartial: “But that's exciting to someone like me because 50 people said ‘I can't even be impartial,’ which I admire them for their forthrightness and their honesty because you have to be honest when you're a juror.” But while claiming she “still believe[d] they will be able to find an impartial jury,” Hostin contradicted herself by adding: “They’re never going to find that.” She then went on to hype how the legal teams were going to comb through the social media accounts of prospective jurors for signs they support Trump: They are never going to find someone that doesn't know about the former twice-impeached loser president. Right? They're never going to find that. But what I did find also interesting about my Super Bowl that the legal teams will be checking the jurors’ social media profiles to see if they can access the truthfulness and intention of what they said during voir dire, which is their questioning.     “And I think that’s really, really important because, if you start liking Trump, you follow Trump stuff on social media, are you going to -- can you be impartial? I don't think so,” she declared without a consideration to keeping Trump haters off of the jury. In fact, her fear was that a Trump supporter would “sneak onto that jury” by lying about hating Trump: HOSTIN: You get one person that sneaks onto that jury with untoward feelings, that person can hang that jury. BEHAR: How do you sneak onto a jury? You have to be called to a jury. HOSTIN: Well, you lie. You lie. You say, “I hate Trump. But I can be impartial. And I this and that.” BEHAR: I see. HOSTIN: And then, all of a sudden, that’s the person who won’t vote to convict. While she’s worried someone biased in Trump’s favor would be allowed on the jury, she was blinded by her unhinged hatred for him to think a prospective juror announcing “I hate Trump” was the impartial position. “Where are they going to find a jury of his peers, how many bloated orange psychos are out there?” so-called comedian Joy Behar quipped. “Yeah. It’s going to be tough,” Hostin agreed. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View April 16, 2024 11:04:40 a.m. Eastern (…) JOY BEHAR: Oh, it’s just beginning. SUNNY HOSTIN: I'm not trumped out at all. SARA HAINES: I’m so Trumped out. HOSTIN: This is a legal nerd's Super Bowl. Right? Like, I'm kind of excited about this. ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: They haven’t even picked a juror. HOSTIN: But that's exciting to someone like me because 50 people said “I can't even be impartial,” which I admire them for their forthrightness and their honesty because you have to be honest when you're a juror. But I still believe they will be able to find an impartial jury. They are never going to find someone that doesn't know about the former twice impeached loser president. Right? BEHAR: Yeah. HOSTIN: They're never going to find that. But what I did find also interesting about my Super Bowl that the legal teams will be checking the jurors’ social media profiles to see if they can access the truthfulness and intention of what they said during voir dire, which is their questioning. And I think that’s really, really important because, if you start liking Trump, you follow Trump stuff on social media, are you going to -- can you be impartial? I don't think so. And I think what could happen in a case like this, if you have someone – and we were talking about it this morning, someone named Clay Travis sort of telling people to get onto that jury. You get one person that sneaks onto that jury with untoward feelings, that person can hang that jury. BEHAR: How do you sneak onto a jury? You have to be called to a jury. HOSTIN: Well, you lie. You lie. You say, “I hate Trump. But I can be impartial. And I this and that” BEHAR: I see. HOSTIN: And then, all of a sudden, that’s the person who won’t vote to convict. BEHAR: Where are they going to find a jury of his peers, how many bloated orange psychos are out there? HOSTIN: Yeah. It’s going to be tough. (…)

NBC Wonders: Why the ‘Average Person’ Doesn’t Understand the Climate Crisis?

Open contempt for average people and attempts at influencing the election. That’s what was on display during NBC’s Today 3rd Hour last Friday when the co-anchors sat down with far-left climate alarmist Al Gore. They huffed about how “the average person just doesn't get it” when it came to the so-called climate crisis. They also urged him to speak about how crucial the upcoming presidential election was for battling climate change. Obviously, they couldn’t get into the topic of climate change without first having co-anchors Dylan Dreyer, Craig Melvin, and Sheinelle Jones shower Gore with obnoxious gooey praise: DREYER: We're back now with a special edition of Today Climate, joined by one of the world's most prominent voices on this crisis. MELVIN: And one of the earliest as well, I would add. For eight years, Al Gore served, of course, as vice president of these United States. And after leaving office, his work to educate people about the climate crisis was featured in the Oscar-winning documentary, An Inconvenient Truth. JONES: His advocacy earned him the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007. Now, he's organization The Climate Reality Project is training thousands of climate leaders this weekend here in New York. It was soon followed up with Melvin lamenting “the average person” and their seeming lack of understanding about the so-called “climate crisis.”     After they noted Gore was in New York “to train leaders and advocates” and commended those people for how they “get it,” Melvin seemed to suggest the “average person” just couldn’t understand. “Do you think that the average person in this country understands the urgency of the crisis?” he wondered. “Is that an area where you see that we made some headway? Or do you still think that the average person just doesn't get it yet?” Gore said he felt that “most people” understand and that “mother nature is the most persuasive” in getting them to understand. He then went on a brief unhinged rant about how “the extra heat energy” being trapped by pollution each day equaled “750,000 Hiroshima-class atomic bombs exploding every day.” “Wow!” Jones exclaimed while not asking for any evidence for such a wild claim. “It’s hard to wrap my head around a number that big,” Gore added. Pivoting to the fast-approaching presidential election, Dreyer wanted to know it how the results “will impact where we're at with climate change right now? Not just here but around the world.” Initially, Gore bragged that the outcome didn’t matter because, “in some ways, what you might call a big wheel moving in the right direction that's kind of unstoppable.” But seemingly realizing that his answer didn’t carry enough hysteria that would lead people to get out and vote, he changed his tune: “Those trends are going to continue. But it’s not enough. So, the outcome of these elections in the U.S. and elsewhere in The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: NBC’s Today 3rd Hour April 12, 2024 9:20:47 a.m. Eastern DYLAN DREYER: We're back now with a special edition of Today Climate, joined by one of the world's most prominent voices on this crisis. CRAIG MELVIN: And one of the earliest as well, I would add. For eight years, Al Gore served, of course, as vice president of these United States. And after leaving office, his work to educate people about the climate crisis was featured in the Oscar-winning documentary, An Inconvenient Truth. SHEINELLE JONES: His advocacy earned him the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007. Now, he's organization The Climate Reality Project is training thousands of climate leaders this weekend here in New York. (…) 9:23:16 a.m. Eastern MELVIN: Mr. Vice president, again, you are here to train leaders and advocates. Obviously, they get it. Do you think that the average person in this country understands the urgency of the crisis? Is that an area where you see that we made some headway? Or do you still think that the average person just doesn't get it yet? AL GORE: Well, I think most people do. And mother nature is the most persuasive – the voice on all of this. I mean, you guys talk every day on the weather news about these extreme events. We were talking about it this morning. MELVIN: Right. GORE: We're still put 162 million tons of manmade heat trapping pollution into the thin shell of atmosphere that surrounds the Earth every single day. It builds up – it lingers there for about 100 years, molecule-for-molecule. And the total amount now traps as much extra heat energy every day as would be released by 750,000 Hiroshima-class atomic bombs exploding every day. JONES: Wow! GORE: It’s hard to wrap my head around a number that big. (…) 9:25:03 a.m. Eastern DREYER: So, with the presidential election, you know, less than seven months away, how do you think the outcome of that, whatever happens, will impact where we're at with climate change right now? Not just here but around the world. GORE: Well, I think in some ways there’s, in some ways, what you might call a big wheel moving in the right direction that's kind of unstoppable. What I mean by that is, if you look at all the new electricity generation installed worldwide last year, 87 percent of it was renewables. It’s the cheapest electricity in the history of the world. One in five vehicles are electric now and it will rise rapidly. Those trends are going to continue. But it’s not enough. So, the outcome of these elections in the U.S. and elsewhere in the world this year really will make a difference. (…)

CNN Finally Puts ‘King Charles’ Primetime Show Out of Its Misery

After six months, CNN finally took their poorly-rated primetime show King Charles out back and put it out of its misery. Airing just one night a week on Wednesdays, King Charles was one of the last vestiges of the Chris Licht era of CNN leadership, which purportedly tried to achieve a more fair and balanced approach to reporting the news before an internal revolt of the network’s radical liberals quashed it. Since you’ve likely never heard of the show since its ratings were so poor, no, the show was not hosted by the king of England, but rather CBS Mornings co-host Gayle King and NBA on TNT personality Charles Barkley. CNN thought they were being clever by splicing their names together. Since the November premiere, the show has been a ratings disaster. “The long-hyped premiere of the new weekly primetime series, which aired Wednesday at 10 pm, drew just 501,000 viewers, according to same-day Nielsen ratings,” reported the New York Post. “It finished a distant third among the biggest cable news channels in total viewers, ranking as the smallest of any of CNN’s primetime debuts this year.” The Post also reported that in the months to follow, their numbers continued to fall off: “Since its debut in late November, viewership has dropped 20% for ‘King Charles’ … But the Jan. 31 broadcast, the most recent airing as the program was off this past week, brought in just 400,000 total viewers and 89,000 in the 25-54 demographic, Nielsen figures show.” King and Charles were “even losing out to reruns of old ‘Friends’ and ‘South Park’ episodes.” A problem with CNN’s apparent plan to buy primetime market share by bringing in big names to draw in viewers was that big names come with packed schedules. As The Post noted, Barkley’s hindered how often they could put out episodes since he’d have to fly to New York to do the show every Wednesday between his obligations for TNT’s Inside the NBA: An industry source told The Post that the show was limited by Barkley’s schedule. The NBA Hall of Famer could only do the show on Wednesdays due to his other commitments — namely his role as a co-host of the popular “Inside the NBA” on CNN’s sister station TNT, according to a source close to the network. Barkley had mentioned that his crowded schedule made it more difficult for the show to attract a loyal following. Another possible factor in the show’s cancelation could have been that Barkley’s political ideology didn’t adhere to liberal dogma as staunchly as most CNN hosts. In late February, on the show, Barkley told then-Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley: “Governor, I’m dying to vote for you. I want to give all my energy and all my heart behind your campaign.” His hang-up was her comments about America never being a racist country. King, on the other hand, has a history of ultra-liberal punditry and has donated to the Obama campaign and vacationed with them as though she was part of the family. 

Will NewsGuard Demote NPR’s Perfect Rating After Revelations of Liberal Bias?

On Tuesday, National Public Radio business editor Uri Berliner blew the whistle on the station’s “assembly line” of liberally biased reporting, which he said was being cranked out “one story after another” framed with the leftist worldview. The expose put NPR under the microscope and put a serious blemish on the organization. But the question now is: will that blemish finally force media-scoring agency NewsGuard to downgrade NPR’s perfect 100/100 rating? In his essay entitled “I’ve Been at NPR for 25 Years. Here’s How We Lost America’s Trust,” Berliner explained: “There’s an unspoken consensus about the stories we should pursue and how they should be framed. It’s frictionless—one story after another about instances of supposed racism, transphobia, signs of the climate apocalypse, Israel doing something bad, and the dire threat of Republican policies. It’s almost like an assembly line.” Berliner appeared on NewsNation with host Chris Cuomo Tuesday night and described the current company culture as “a much narrower kind of niche thinking, a group think that's really clustered around various selective progressive views that don’t – they don't allow enough air and enough spaciousness to consider all kinds of perspectives.” That certainly didn’t sound like the type of environment that would be conducive to fair, objective, and unbiased reporting. Especially if their default framing for reporting was that Republican policies were considered a “dire threat” to the country. But as of the publication of this piece, NewsGuard still had NPR rated at perfect 100/100. As MRC Associate Editor for Business & Free Speech America Joseph Vazquez recently reported, NewsGuard can reluctantly downgrade legacy liberal media outlets when they have terrible reporting held up under their nose. NewsGuard was seemingly forced to recently downgrade The New York Times from a perfect 100 to 87.5/100 after the Media Research Center repeatedly called out The Times’ shoddy reporting and NewsGuard’s refusal to act on it. As Vazquez noted in the 2023 study of NewsGuard’s rankings, the point of the whole system was for it to be used as a “cudgel” against right-leaning news organizations: NewsGuard wields its ratings as a cudgel, attempting to scare away advertisers from doing business with media and organizations that have been accused of promoting so-called “misinformation” or wrongthink on a whole host of issues like abortion, climate change, COVID-19 and elections. In so doing, NewsGuard effectively strips media outlets with which it disagrees of their ad money, slowly bleeding out their coffers. This time, the calls were coming from inside the preverbal house with a 25-year NPR veteran being the one to cry foul. Berliner also told Cuomo he was getting – while not public – internal support from some of his NPR colleagues. And a recent Times article noted Berliner was getting backup from former NPR ombudsman Jeffrey A. Dvorkin. The article also reported that internal pushback to Berliner rejected calls for ideological diversity in the newsroom: “In one group, several staff members disputed Mr. Berliner’s points about a lack of ideological diversity and said efforts to recruit more people of color would make NPR’s journalism better.” Clearly, NPR was not deserving of a 100/100 rating. So, how will NewsGuard react?

Hostin: O.J.’s Acquittal Was Fine Because Cops Kill More Than He Did

Following the death of former football player and murderer O.J. Simpson, the dumb and racially charged hot takes from the cast of ABC’s The View were inevitable. Of course, it was staunchly racist and anti-Semitic co-host, Sunny Hostin (the descendant of slave owners) who dredged up the unfounded racial aspects of the case applied by race-hustlers. She even argued that Simpson’s acquittal was fine since, collectively, cops have killed more people than he did. According to Hostin, the case “was less about his guilt or innocence” in the brutal murders of Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman, but “rather about the system and how the system treated African Americans and continues to treat African Americans in this country.” Despite the cases not being related in the slightest, Hostin insisted that a full “context” recounting of Simpson’s trial must include what happened to Rodney King years earlier. “You have to remember in putting it into context the acquittal of the officers who beat Rodney King almost to death in front of the world's eyes was in 1992. This happened in 1994,” she said. Hostin argued that for the black community, which she identified with, the Simpson trial “was less about whether or not O.J. did it” and more about using it as a stand-in for race relations in America. She went on to admit that Simpson may have “got away with it,” but “police officers have killed many more people than O.J. Simpson.”     The race card was also played by faux conservative Ana Navarro, who recalled following the case as a law school student, saying: “It was the first time I was confronted in my lifetime with the racial divides and the painful racial gaps in America.” Navarro said she spoke with former CNN host Don Lemon about Simpson’s death and trial, and he seemed to agree with Hostin’s take. “And I do think, Don Lemon was saying to me yesterday, it was not about guilt or innocence, it was about race. It was so much about race,” she recounted. Co-host Sara Haines injected a bit of sanity into the discussion by refocusing the conversation on to Simpson’s two victims: HAINES: There were innocent people involved here and I'd like to take a moment them. Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman were brutally killed and murdered. And I think that the legal system failed Nicole over and over again. She had called 911 nine times, the crap beaten out of her, bloody in bushes and always released her domestic abuser. BEHAR: Who was O.J. HAINES: Yeah. I just want to not say his name like everyone is because I think the people we need to be focused on are Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman who were more than victims in this. She had kids. She was a beloved woman that missed out on major parts of her life. The Goldman family still longs for their son who was funny, kind, and outgoing. “For whatever went on in the mess of this, my heart continues to go out for those families who lived beyond and without their loved ones,” she said. The silence from Hostin was deafening. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View April 12, 2024 11:03:00 a.m. Eastern (…) SUNNY HOSTIN: You know, I think it was less about his guilt or innocence and rather about the system and how the system treated African Americans, and continues to treat African Americans in this country. You have to remember in putting it into context the acquittal of the officers who beat Rodney King almost to death in front of the world's eyes was in 1992. This happened in 1994. And I think for the black community, it was less about whether or not O.J. did it, because I think even today you'll go to, you know, barber shops and beauty salons and people will say “he did it,” but he got away with it and the police officers, you know, police officers have killed many more people than O.J. Simpson. JOY BEHAR: Probably I think they didn't trust that the police did not plant evidence because -- HOSTIN: Well, Mark Furman said on the witness stand, “I never used a racial slur.” By the way, people, when a lawyer in cross-examination in a courtroom says, “have you ever done this?” they know that you did it. [Laughter] Right? And so then they come up with tapes and he's using the "N" word like Christmas. BEHAR: But don't you think some of the reason he got away with it was because he was famous not just that he was black? ANA NAVARRO: There were so many reasons. The prosecution had a lot of failures. And, yes, I think part of the reason that it's so fascinating. Look, it's fascinating because it was O.J. Simpson. He was a celebrity, he was rich, he was a successful athlete, we all knew who he was, and he was in car rental company commercials. But it's one of these instances in American history where if you're of a certain age, everybody remembers where you were the day that the verdict was read. HOSTIN: And when the Bronco chase was happening. NAVARRO: Everything. BEHAR: Well, it was covered extensively. NAVARRO: Like with 9/11, with the JFK death, with Challenger explosion. HOSTIN: Michael Jackson’s death. NAVARRO: It reaches that level because I think it's had such cultural significance. It launched so many careers. It changed the way we cover courts. HOSTIN: Camera were in the courtroom. NAVARRO: For me it was the first time and I know it sounds naive to a lot of people but I grew up in Miami in a bubble. I went to a school that was 98 percent Latina immigrant Catholic girls. It was the first time I was confronted in my lifetime with the racial divides and the painful racial gaps in America. And I remember watching it. I remember I was at the student union in law school and the black students were on side and the white – non-blacks were on the other side. The black students erupted into cheers, the white -- everybody else was with jaws agape, and it's something that still is happening in so many cases. And I do think, Don Lemon was saying to me yesterday, it was not about guilt or innocence, it was about race. It was so much about race. SARA HAINES: There were innocent people involved here and I'd like to take a moment them. Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman were brutally killed and murdered. And I think that the legal system failed Nicole over and over again. She had called 911 nine times, the crap beaten out of her, bloody in bushes and always released her domestic abuser. BEHAR: Who was O.J. HAINES: Yeah. I just want to not say his name like everyone is because I think the people we need to be focused on are Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman who were more than victims in this. She had kids. She was a beloved woman that missed out on major parts of her life. The Goldman family still longs for their son who was funny, kind, and outgoing. BEHAR: He was really an innocent bystander. HAINES: They both were innocent. BEHAR: She was not a bystander, but – HAINES: For whatever went on in the mess of this, my heart continues to go out for those families who lived beyond and without their loved ones. (…)

Millionaire Whoopi Dismisses High Food Prices, Whines About Commute

ABC’s millionaire moderator, Whoopi Goldberg was in a foul mood during Thursday’s edition of The View because former White House Chief of Staff Ron Klain dared to say President Biden should focus his reelection message on issues that average Americans were concerned with such as inflation and high grocery prices. She repeatedly shouted down any attempt to suggest he had the power to curtail inflation but then went on about how expensive her commute was as if Biden could deal with it. According to big brain Goldberg, who recently couldn’t remember which years former President Trump ran for office, Biden wasn’t responsible for inflation at grocery stores; rather, it was the stores just raising prices for the hell of it. “I think our kvetch is not with him for grocery prices. I’m mad at the grocery stores, because if all of the things have been open why are you still raising prices?” she shouted. Faux conservative Alyssa Farah Griffin tried to argue that prices were the top concern of the undecided voters she’s spoken to and that there was a way for Biden to address it, but Goldberg repeatedly shouted over her, suggesting if those “people knew civics” as she did they’d know they were wrong (Click “expand”): FARAH GRIFFIN: What I hear when I talk to undecideds is “the grocery bills are--” GOLDBERG (interrupting): Yes, but if the people knew civics they would know that is not his -- FARAH GRIFFIN: There are absolutely things that Biden can do to address it and grocery prices have jumped 25 percent over four years. JOY BEHAR: What can he do? [Crosstalk] FARAH GRIFFIN: Hang on real quick. This is the reality. It’s the most immediate and repetitive thing. You have to buy groceries every week. GOLDBERG (interrupting): We get all that. But the question is what do you want him to do? What can he do? FARAH GRIFFIN: He can challenge the major grocery chains if he wants to. There are things that he could do with – that he could encourage the Fed to do. Goldberg insisted Biden was “doing stuff he’s supposed to be doing. He’s doing what he’s supposed to be doing,” but never explained what that “stuff” was.     Farah Griffin tried to reiterate that “Americans are spending 11 percent of their income on food” but Goldberg interjected with her own problems. “I'm an American. I'm a little pissed off about over-the-price stuff, but I’ll tell you what I'm really pissed off about,” she shrieked. “I wanted to talk about why the people in New Jersey now are facing not just getting the prices raised on the buses and trains…” Suggesting that Biden was in a damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don’t scenario, Goldberg argued that he was just a busy guy getting pulled in different directions: Listen, he can do what he did with the gas people. He can do everything but then he's not going to be able to take care of what he needs to do in Israel, then he's not taking care -- I mean, it's like, there's a lot of stuff to do but we get it. We know there's a lot to do. Backing up Goldberg through all of this, was staunchly racist and anti-Semitic co-host, Sunny Hostin (the descendant of slave owners), who was blaming the high prices on grocery stores. Without evidence, she accused all grocery stores of “price gauging.” “Maybe we just need corporations like these grocery stores to be good corporate citizens and stop gouging! Stop trying to make money off of our backs!” she shouted. A little over a year ago, Hostin bragged that she hadn’t gone grocery shopping in years, ever since the COVID pandemic. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View April 11, 2024 11:05:49 a.m. Eastern (…) WHOOPI GOLDBERG: I think our kvetch is not with him for grocery prices. I’m mad at the grocery stores, because if all of the things have been open why are you still raising prices? (…) 11:07:07 a.m. Eastern ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: What I hear when I talk to undecideds is “the grocery bills are--” GOLDBERG (interrupting): Yes, but if the people knew civics they would know that is not his -- FARAH GRIFFIN: There are absolutely things that Biden can do to address it and grocery prices have jumped 25 percent over four years. JOY BEHAR: What can he do? [Crosstalk] FARAH GRIFFIN: Hang on real quick. This is the reality. It’s the most immediate and repetitive thing. You have to buy groceries every week. GOLDBERG (interrupting): We get all that. But the question is what do you want him to do? What can he do? FARAH GRIFFIN: He can challenge the major grocery chains if he wants to. There are things that he could do with – that he could encourage the Fed to do. SUNNY HOSTIN: Challenge how? Can he take them to court? BEHAR: So far, we're in a free country. GOLDBERG: Let her answer. FARAH GRIFFIN: There are a number of things to be done but to say, “I wash my hands, it's not my problem you can’t afford groceries.” HOSTIN: But what can he do? Can he take them to court because they’re price gauging? FARAH GRIFFIN: No, it's not a matter of taking them to court. [Crosstalk] SARA HAINES: I see what you’re saying. Even campaigning on things like that helps. Because I think also making room for immigration would be helpful here. One of the things, if you're looking towards the election if you want to grab people and get them voting, immigration is one of the most agreed upon problems. GOLDBERG: But here's the problem, he does -- He goes and he takes care of what he's supposed to be taking care of, which is the bridge and how to open – just hold on. FARAH GRIFFIN: I don't think that's what Ron Klain was saying. He was talking about him going to – [crosstalk] infrastructure projects – [Crosstalk] GOLDBERG: But here's the thing, you know, people are bitching if he does stuff, they bitch if he doesn't do stuff. Listen, he’s doing stuff he’s supposed to be doing. He’s doing what he’s supposed to be doing. But I'm pissed off. [Crosstalk] FARAH GRIFFIN: Americans are spending 11 percent of their income on food, the most – GOLDBERG (interrupting): I'm an American. I'm a little pissed off about over-the-price stuff, but I’ll tell you what I'm really pissed off about. I’m really pissed out that people seem to think that the American citizen is a wallet where you can just get your hand in through. That's what I wanted to talk about. I wanted to talk about why the people in New Jersey now are facing not just getting the prices raised on the buses and trains— HOSTIN: Congestion pricing. GOLDBERG: No, no, this is on the Jersey side. HAINES: Yeah, I know, but it's all part of the same -- GOLDBERG: But the congestion pricing isn't making me as nuts as -- FARAH GRIFFIN: I just want to underscore. I think it's a fair point. There's not one box he can check and suddenly grocery prices go down. That would be ridiculous to suggest but what is being told by advisers is, “You need to speak to what people are feeling. You need to speak to this very real reality.” I make a lot of money. I put a red onion back the other day because it was $4.99. That's ridiculous! GOLDBERG: Yeah, but, again, he can talk -- Listen, he can do what he did with the gas people. He can do everything but then he's not going to be able to take care of what he needs to do in Israel, then he's not taking care -- I mean, it's like, there's a lot of stuff to do but we get it. We know there's a lot to do. My kvetch with him is – Listen, Ron, if there's something you want him to talk about, let's say, listen, we know you're doing all this stuff but when you say, “I don't want him to be talking about bridges anymore,” it sounds to people who live and need that bridge like they're being dismissive. HOSTIN: Maybe we just need corporations like these grocery stores to be good corporate citizens and stop gouging! Stop trying to make money off of our backs! (…)

Cuomo Frets NPR Will Target ‘Whistleblower’ Who Exposed Their Liberal Bias

25-year NPR veteran Uri Berliner recently came forward to call out his employer and colleagues for being liberally biased in a way that was harming the credibility of their reporting. And in a Tuesday night appearance on NewsNation’s Cuomo, host Chris Cuomo shared his concern that NPR would target him and “kick [him] to the curb.” But Berliner said he was getting a lot of support from colleagues, including from surprising sources. “On that issue of media trust, there was a bombshell today, a whistleblower in effect on bias in the media,” Cuomo announced at the top of the show. “Among his claims: NPR was stacked with like-minded people who appealed to an ever-narrow, progressive worldview catering to a select audience and losing its audience as a result.” Cuomo agreed with Berliner’s assessment that “political diversity” was not something newsrooms prioritized, adding that it was one of the reasons he chose to join NewsNation: 87 Democrats, not a single Republican. Does he have a point? Yup! Do newsrooms lack diversity? Well, depends what boxes you want to check. Political diversity. It's a big at NewsNation. We've got all kinds here. The disagreement is organic and so are the common concerns.     When asked about what the response was in-house at NPR, Berliner said he got the expected pushback from the managers he called out but was getting a lot of support from many others, including some surprising individuals: I'm not surprised by the response that, you know, came from management and the same managers that I’ve been making a lot of these points about. And they're certainly entitled to that perspective. I will say, I've had a lot of support from colleagues, many of them unexpected, who say they agree with me. Some of them say this confidentially, but I think there's been a lot of response saying, “Look, these are things that need to be addressed. We haven't. We've been too reluctant, too frightened, too timid to deal with these things. And I think that this is the right opportunity to bring it all out in the open. This seemed to preemptively relieve Cuomo of some of his concern for Berliner’s future at the station. “I hope you saved up your money. You are a business editor, so hopefully you’re good with your own investing because they're going to kick you to the curb and nobody’s going to want you,” he quipped. “I’m not worried. You know, I think people want open dialogue. I think people want to have honest debates,” Berliner replied. On how NPR had gotten so liberally biased, Cuomo wondered: “Are you saying that's the truth or are you saying it's something that has evolved? What do you want people to feel about NPR and what you feel about the media in general?” Berliner felt that NPR had “a liberal orientation” at first but “evolved” to be a place of “much narrower kind of niche thinking, a group think that's really clustered around various selective progressive views.” He added that “they don't allow enough air and enough spaciousness to consider all kinds of perspectives.” Reminiscing about how things used to be, he suggested they used to be “kind of nerdy and really like[d] to dig into things and understand the complexity of things.” The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: NewsNation’s Cuomo April 9, 2024 8:09:54 p.m. Eastern CHRIS CUOMO: On that issue of media trust, there was a bombshell today, a whistleblower in effect on bias in the media. One of the most, you know, the biggest, most respected names in the news, National Public Radio. Today, senior business editor Uri Berliner published a story in Free Press, Substack. The headline? “I've been and NPR for 25 years. Here's how we lost America's trust.” Among his claims: NPR was stacked with like-minded people who appealed to an ever-narrow, progressive worldview catering to a select audience and losing its audience as a result. He also says stories were ignored, mistakes made, corrections never issue, and that all, quote, “shatters trusted and engenders cynicism about the media.” And when he dug into voter registration at NPR in Washington, guess what he found. 87 Democrats, not a single Republican. Does he have a point? Yup! Do newsroom's lack diversity? Well, depends what boxes you want to check. Political diversity. It's a big at NewsNation. We've got all kinds here. The disagreement is organic and so are the common concerns. So, I want to bring in brother Berliner because that was a brave thing he did, man. Your competition is your critic base in this business. And you knew when you wrote this, you aren’t going to get a chorus of amens, you're going to get people probably digging garbage and saying it's not true. And sure enough, colleagues came forward to do what you had to expect that we're going to do, which is say, ‘We disagree. Uri’s entitled to his opinion. But we disagreed about the nature and quality of our reporting.’ What do you make of their response? What do you make of the attention? URI BERLINER: I'm not surprised by the response that, you know, came from management and the same managers that I’ve been making a lot of these points about. And they're certainly entitled to that perspective. I will say, I've had a lot of support from colleagues, many of them unexpected, who say they agree with me. Some of them say this confidentially, but I think there's been a lot of response saying, “Look, these are things that need to be addressed. We haven't. We've been too reluctant, too frightened, too timid to deal with these things. And I think that this is the right opportunity to bring it all out in the open. CUOMO: So, for those who are sitting there saying, “I knew it! NPR, those laconic lefties, you know, with the slow delivery and just feeding us all of this.” Are you saying that's the truth or you saying it's something that has evolved? What do you want people to feel about NPR and what you feel about the media in general? BERLINER: I think it's evolved. You know, I've been at NPR a long time. 25 years. You could say I'm a lifer. And it's a place that always loved working. But when I started there was a liberal orientation. But I think we were more guided by curiosity, open mindedness. You know, you said talked about policy. We're kind of nerdy and really likes to dig into things and understand the complexity of things. I think that's evolved over the years into a much narrower kind of niche thinking, a group think that's really clustered around various selective progressive views that don’t – they don't allow enough air and enough spaciousness to consider all kinds of perspectives. CUOMO: So, you used some very powerful words that people kind of see as sacrosanct. Whether it's, you know, indicating bias of what people call “woke” these days or “political correctness” or “cancel culture.” You know, these are often seen as instruments of the left. One, were you worried that – I hope you saved up your money? You are a business editor, so hopefully you’re good with your own investing because they're going to kick you to the curb and nobody’s going to want you. Especially as you a white guy, you know, who's not 18. So, what do you make of going after these sacred cows? BERLINER: I’m not worried. You know, I think people want open dialogue. I think people want to have honest debates. (…)

ABC Disinformers: Alito Appointed By Trump, GOP Wants ‘Slavery Back’

Disturbingly, The View was under the ABC News umbrella and was not classified as an entertainment show. They’ve also bragged about being held to the same standards as every other ABC journalist. They flouted this on Wednesday’s episode when moderator Whoopi Goldberg falsely asserted that Republicans were clamoring to bring back slavery, and co-host Joy Behar falsely claimed Justice Samuel Alito was appointed by former President Trump. In the wake of the Arizona Supreme Court upholding an abortion ban from the 1860s, staunchly racist and anti-Semitic co-host, Sunny Hostin (the descendant of slave owners) suggested that Alito had hidden secret language in his majority opinion that gave the power to the states to regulate abortions how they sought fit: Justice Samuel Alito is the person who wrote for the majority, and he said, “Roe's failure even to note the overwhelming consensus of state laws in effect in 1868 is striking.” So, to be very clear, he wrote a road map for the states so that they could look in their books and go back to the 1860s, even before Arizona was founded, which was in 1912, and gave them the game book.     In reality, returning abortion law decisions to the states was the entire point of Dobbs V. Jackson. Hostin being a former federal prosecutor made that analysis and what followed even more disheartening. When Behar falsely claimed that Trump was the president who appointed Alito (when it was President George W. Bush), Hostin backed her up: BEHAR: And he was appointed by Donald Trump. HOSTIN: Yes, he was. The next bit of disinformation that was spewed came from Goldberg building off the abortion discussion. According to her twisted brain, not only were Republicans interested in “rolling back” so-called “abortion rights,” “in their minds they want to bring slavery back. They're okay with it.” She proclaimed all that without any evidence whatsoever. Goldberg followed up by praising progressive activist justices on the bench. “One of the good things about the Supreme Court is you can fight to make sure you make stuff better. You don't generally fight to make stuff worse,” she said. “So, how is that going to roll? How is that going to roll? What's the next thing? Because, you know on this -- with all of this comes birth control. With all of this comes everything that you need as a woman to have had put in place to make sure that we were doing better than we were before,” she added. It was only then did Behar issued a correction for her misinformation about Alito. “Just let me make a correction. It was George W. Bush who appointed Alito, not Trump,” she said. Hostin also backed her up on that as well, agreeing, “It wasn’t Trump.” At least Hostin was a ride-or-die no matter what comes out of their mouths? The View’s executive producer, Brian Teta recently did an interview with Deadline where he made a big deal out of how they don’t want to give people like Trump a platform to spread disinformation and misinformation. Apparently, that right was exclusive to the co-hosts. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View April 10, 2024 11:06:27 a.m. Eastern (…) SUNNY HOSTIN: Justice Samuel Alito is the person who wrote for the majority, and he said, “Roe's failure even to note the overwhelming consensus of state laws in effect in 1868 is striking.” So be very clear, he wrote a road map for the states so that they could look in their books and go back to the 1860s, even before Arizona was founded, which was in 1912, and gave them the game book. JOY BEHAR: And he was appointed by Donald Trump. HOSTIN: Yes, he was. BEHAR: Who took the credit for overthrowing Roe V. Wade. (…) 11:07:53 a.m. Eastern WHOOPI GOLDBERG: Take a look at -- Take a look at the things that they're rolling back. Remember I said ages ago, you know, in their minds they want to bring slavery back. They're okay with it because –You see, things change. One of the good things about the Supreme Court is you can fight to make sure you make stuff better. You don't generally fight to make stuff worse. HOSTIN: Or to roll back. GOLDBERG: Or to roll back. And to me, if you're okay rolling that back when things were not even a state, when we had no say. HOSTIN: Yeah. GOLDBERG: So, how is that going to roll? How is that going to roll? What's the next thing? Because, you know on this -- with all of this comes birth control. With all of this comes everything that you need as a woman to have had put in place to make sure that we were doing better than we were before. [Crosstalk] BEHAR: Hold on because I have to make a correction. ANA NAVARRO: Hold on. I haven't spoken on this and I’d like to. BEHAR: Just let me make a correction. NAVARRO: Go ahead. BEHAR: It was George W. Bush who appointed Alito, not Trump. HOSTIN: It wasn’t Trump. NAVARRO: Well, but – BEHAR: Trump just got the others in which helped Alito. (…)

Whoopi Goldberg Couldn’t Remember What Years Trump Ran for President

As moderator for ABC’s The View, Whoopi Goldberg made it a point of pride to never say former President Donald Trump’s name; preferring to call him “you know who” like he’s Voldemort from Harry Potter. She’s also been one of President Biden’s biggest defenders when it came to criticism about his age and mental acuity. But during Tuesday’s show, Goldberg apparently couldn’t remember which years Trump ran for president and had to be walked through it. Kicking off the show with Trump’s recent comments about his position on “abortion rights,” Goldberg wanted to make fun of how “it landed with a thud with a ton of conservatives.” She noted that “anti-abortion activists are slamming it as a betrayal to people who voted for him in 2016 and 2020,” before pausing and asking: “What does it--? voted for him in 2016 and 2020? How did that—?”     Co-host Joy Behar had to walk her through the fact that Trump had run and received votes in those years: BEHAR: Well, they voted for him in both – people who voted for him voted in those elections. GOLDBERG: Okay. Gotcha. SUNNY HOSTIN: Real Trumpers. GOLDBERG: But he lost, right? BEHAR: Yeah. Yeah. He lost big. Yeah. HOSTIN: Bigley. BEHAR: The second time. Bigley. “I just wanted to make sure I wasn't wrong here,” Goldberg tried to downplay her confusion and eventually put the focus back on Trump’s abortion comments. But before giving Behar kudos for helping Goldberg out, be warned that later in the segment she suggested that conservative leaders were competing to see who could cook up policies to hurt women the most: Number one, first of all, Pence, Lindsey Graham, and Trump are fighting to see who could make women's lives more miserable. That's like what they're really fighting for. How can we really destroy women in this country? That's it. “Lindsey Graham will be on his knees flying down to Mar-a-Lago -- if he had a spine he could sit upright on the plane but he doesn't have a spine, so what's he going to do? I mean, he just goes back and forth trying to get his pension,” she chided. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View April 9, 2024 11:02:14 a.m. Eastern (…) WHOOPI GOLDBERG: He's kicking abortion rights back to the states. It's not landing well -- it landed with a thud with a ton of conservatives and his former VP, his minion Lindsey Graham, and anti-abortion activists are slamming it as a betrayal to people who voted for him in 2016 and 2020. [Pauses] What does it--? voted for him in 2016 and 2020? How did that—? JOY BEHAR: Well, they voted for him in both – people who voted for him voted in those elections. GOLDBERG: Okay. Gotcha. SUNNY HOSTIN: Real Trumpers. GOLDBERG: But he lost, right? BEHAR: Yeah. Yeah. He lost big. Yeah. HOSTIN: Bigley. BEHAR: The second time. Bigley. GOLDBERG: I just wanted to make sure I wasn't wrong here. (…) 11:06:17 a.m. Eastern BEHAR: Number one, first of all, Pence, Lindsey Graham, and Trump are fighting to see who could make women's lives more miserable. That's like what they're really fighting for. How can we really destroy women in this country? That's it. Lindsey Graham will be on his knees flying down to Mar-a-Lago -- if he had a spine he could sit upright on the plane but he doesn't have a spine, so what's he going to do? I mean, he just goes back and forth trying to get his pension. (…)

CBS, NBC Ignore ISIS-Inspired Terror Plot Targeting Idaho Christians

One would think the liberal broadcast networks would be eager to give President Biden a counterterrorism win during an election year, or at least praise the FBI for finally stopping an ISIS-inspired terrorist attack before it happened. But during Tuesday morning’s newscasts, CBS News and NBC News ignored the story of the FBI foiling a plot to target Christian parishioners in multiple Idaho churches last weekend. Instead of talking about the Christians who were in the crosshairs of a radical Islamic terrorist, NBC’s Today freaked out about A.I.-generated images in advertisements. Meanwhile, CBS Mornings was lauding the removal of a dam to boost salmon numbers. ABC’s Good Morning America was the only broadcast network to dedicate any time to the story; not only did they cover it, but they led their newscast with it. “First the arrest of an Idaho man on charges of plotting to carry out deadly attacks on churches in support of ISIS. The FBI director calls it a truly horrific plan,” co-anchor George Stephanopoulos announced at the top of the show. While the attack wasn’t planned for the recent Easter services, chief justice correspondent Pierre Thomas noted that the plot was planned around a Muslim holiday. “The suspect was arrested on Saturday just hours before the alleged planned assault on Sunday. Authorities say he had picked a specific church where he would start his attack, set for the end of Ramadan,” he reported.     Thomas showed a picture of the alleged terrorist, Alexander Mercurio posing with an ISIS flag. He was allegedly planning to attack “multiple churches in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho.” “The FBI says his plot involved a murderous rampage using knives and firearms to kill parishioners. He also planned to set their houses of worship on fire, going from church to church until he was killed by police. It's a plan eerily similar to that ISIS assault on that concert hall in Moscow,” Thomas added. In addition to the evidence of Mercurio buying the supplies to start the fires, there’s also a recording of him pledging his allegiance to ISIS. The recent ISIS attack on the Moscow concert hall was apparently an event that got law enforcement officials in the U.S. nervous about other Islamic radicals with delusions of grandeur: Mercurio's arrest comes at a state of heightened alert by U.S. law enforcement. Authorities have been concerned about rage ignited by the Israel/Hamas War, and late last week they sent out an urgent bulletin warning that ISIS was trying to use their horrific attack on that Moscow concert to inspire radicals here to conduct U.S. attacks. “In announcing this arrest last night, we received statements from both the attorney general and the FBI director, both expressing deep concern. Their statements a sign of just how serious this case is and just how dangerous the threat environment is right now,” Thomas concluded. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s Good Morning America April 9, 2024 7:03:02 a.m. Eastern GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: First the arrest of an Idaho man on charges of plotting to carry out deadly attacks on churches in support of ISIS. The FBI director calls it a truly horrific plan. Chief justice correspondent Pierre Thomas has the latest. Good morning, Pierre. PIERRE THOMAS: George, good morning. The suspect was arrested on Saturday just hours before the alleged planned assault on Sunday. Authorities say he had picked a specific church where he would start his attack, set for the end of Ramadan. [Cuts to video] This morning, the FBI claims this 18-year-old was on the verge of conducting a terror plot involving attacks on multiple churches in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho. Alexander Mercurio, seen here knife in hand, expressing his allegiance to ISIS. The FBI says his plot involved a murderous rampage using knives and firearms to kill parishioners. He also planned to set their houses of worship on fire, going from church to church until he was killed by police. It's a plan eerily similar to that ISIS assault on that concert hall in Moscow. BRAD GARRETT (former FBI special agent): He talked about using knives, fire, and possibly weapons. And so the combination of all three if, in fact, he did launch that, had the possibility of harming a lot of people. THOMAS: According to criminal charges unsealed last night, Mercurio had bought a number of items for his attacks including butane canisters for setting fires. And those charges say, on Saturday, Mercurio sent an audio file to an FBI confidential informant; 20-seconds long, it says in part: “I'm answering the call for the Islamic State for jihad…and to kill.” The charges against Mercurio lay out a chilling plan where he would quote, “incapacitate his father, retrain him using handcuffs and steal his firearms to use for maximum casualties in his attack.” Sources tell ABC News his father had dozens of weapons including an AR-15 style assault rifle. Mercurio's arrest comes at a state of heightened alert by U.S. law enforcement. Authorities have been concerned about rage ignited by the Israel/Hamas War, and late last week they sent out an urgent bulletin warning that ISIS was trying to use their horrific attack on that Moscow concert to inspire radicals here to conduct U.S. attacks. [Cuts back to live] In announcing this arrest last night, we received statements from both the attorney general and the FBI director, both expressing deep concern. Their statements a sign of just how serious this case is and just how dangerous the threat environment is right now. Michael. MICHAEL STRAHAN: We’re happy they were able to stop him though. Pierre, thank you very much for that.

The View ‘Stopped Asking’ Trump to Be on Show, Expect Biden Appearance

In an interview with Deadline published last week, Brian Teta [pictured right], the executive producer of ABC’s The View, admitted that they have “stopped asking” former President Trump to be on the show, and requests would resume on a “case-by-case” basis depending on who he picked as vice president. On the flipside, Teta expected President Biden to make an appearance to get a tongue bath from the co-hosts sometime before the election. Unironically, he claimed their main sticking point was “disinformation” and “misinformation” making its way onto the show. Deadline broached the subject by way of NBC’s snafu with former RNC chairwoman Ronna McDaniel. “Would you have on as a guest a [Trump] true believer, maybe even McDaniel?” Deadline wondered. “You know, I have to look at it,” Teta said. “But we made the choice not to consider election deniers when we did our co-host search. The disinformation part of it is something to consider always.” On whether or not they planned to have Trump on the ABC News program, Teta admitted that they’ve “stopped asking” him to come on the show because he keeps declining, but also added that his “misinformation” played a key role in their decision too: DEADLINE: Given that we’re getting further and further into the election year, are you considering having Trump or any of his surrogates on the show? TETA: Again, it’s case by case. We’ll see who the VP is, when they’re announcing. We’ve invited Trump to join us at the table for both 2016 and 2020 elections, and he declined, and at a certain point, we stopped asking. So I don’t anticipate that changing. I think he’s pretty familiar with how the co-hosts feels about him and doesn’t see himself coming here. There’s no question we reach an important audience. This season we had Tim Scott on. We’ve had prominent Republicans on often and will continue to. We had Ted Cruz on last year. That’s what the show is. That’s the genius of what Barbara Walters and Bill Geddie put together here, a show of different perspectives. And I think that it’s an important thing for us to do that. But at the same time, we’re not going to put people on there to [spread] misinformation. In another part of the interview, Teta claimed that The View was still held to ABC’s “news standards.”“Even though we’re an opinion show, we’re governed by news standards, so we would call out anything like that in real time [sic],” he defended the show. Apparently, the spreading of “disinformation” and “misinformation” on the show was something reserved for the co-hosts to do. In regards to Monday’s solar eclipse and the previous week’s earthquake in New Jersey, staunchly racist and anti-Semitic co-host, Sunny Hostin (the descendant of slave owners) asserted, without evidence, that both were caused by “climate change.” She said the same thing about the coming cicada mating season despite them being on a known breeding schedule [video below].     The show’s other forays into “disinformation” and “misinformation” in recent weeks included claiming Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was trying to “buy” the election, pushed the “bloodbath” hoax against Trump, claimed migrant women don’t get raped in or near the U.S., Hostin claimed former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley didn’t really miss her deployed husband, and Joy Behar claimed NATO was the military alliance that beat Adolf Hitler and the Nazis. Just to name a few. Being on top of The View’s lies and calling out their hypocrisy like this was important because, as the Deadline article noted: “The show has been up 3% in total viewers season to date, and has continued to top daytime talk shows and news programs in viewership and households.”

Sunny Hostin Claims the Solar Eclipse, Earthquake Caused by ‘Climate Change’

The liberal media loved to portray conservatives, Republicans, Trump supporters, and pretty much anyone right of center as crazy conspiracy theorists who shouldn’t be allowed a platform anywhere. But during Monday’s edition of The View, staunchly racist and anti-Semitic co-host, Sunny Hostin (the descendant of slave owners) proved just how dim she was when she asserted in all seriousness that Monday’s solar eclipse, Friday’s earthquake, and the coming cicada breeding season were all caused by “climate change.” Hostin’s unhinged conspiracy theories may have been the wildest, but they were not the first during the episode. Faux conservative Alyssa Farah Griffin rhetorically scoffed at the idea that the Friday earthquake in New Jersey was a sign that Jesus was returning, but suggested former President Trump’s gold club had something to do with it: So, what’s kind of crazy is with the earthquake on Friday and then the eclipse today, people are having all sorts of conspiracies about the end of the world. And then I read online that the earthquake epicenter was actually at Bedminster in New Jersey. Fun fact. So it originated with Trump. Hostin, a self-proclaimed devout Catholic, laughed about how their studio makeup artist “put on her coat” and “ran down the hallway” during the earthquake saying “Jesus is coming” and “the rapture is here.” She also bloviated about how it was the first time in 100 years that two different cicada broods were emerging for their mating seasons at the same time.     Apparently, all the pieces were on the table and only Hostin was smart enough to put them together, and “climate change” was the answer. “All those things together would maybe lead one to believe that either climate change exists, or something is really going on,” she proclaimed. You knew things were bad when Joy Behar and Whoopi Goldberg were the voices of reason. “Except earthquakes are not at the mercy of climate change. It's underground. It can’t,” Behar pushed back. But Hostin wouldn’t listen to reason. “How about the warming of the planet?” she huffed in what she seemingly thought was a checkmate, without evidence of how it would cause earthquakes miles below the earth’s surface. “No, it happens. And the eclipse, they've known about the eclipse coming because eclipses happen and they actually can say when these things are going to happen,” Goldberg argued. She also went off on how God would not give a warning about when the end times would occur: So, all these folks who are saying, “You know, it's a sign from God,” God doesn't give you warning. Okay? You think he gave people at the Tower of Babble warning? “Oh, I'm about to jack y'all up.” No. God does stuff and then you figure, “Oh, that's probably because I just – uh” [pretends to die]. You know? Goldberg and Hostin also got into it over the cicada brood emergences occurring because of climate change. Goldberg noted that their breeding cycles have been known for a while and they’re sticking to it (Click “expand”): HOSTIN: Cicadas. For the first time in like 100 years, there’s two different kinds – GOLDBERG: No. No. No. No. No. No, No. No. That’s not – No. No. HOSTIN: Well, that is what I read. Two different kind of -- GOLDBERG: There's two different kinds of cicadas coming. HOSTIN: Yeah, two different times are coming. BEHAR: The good cicadas and the bad cicadas. GOLDBERG: No. HOSTIN: This is for the first time in many, many years. GOLDBERG: No. Every 17 years this happens. Hostin’s defense basically came down to “that's not what I read” online. It’s worth mentioning again that The View is under the ABC News umbrella. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View April 8, 2024 11:03:39 a.m. Eastern (…) ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: So, what’s kind of crazy is with the earthquake on Friday and then the eclipse today, people are having all sorts of conspiracies about the end of the world. And then I read online that the earthquake epicenter was actually at Bedminster in New Jersey. JOY BEHAR: Right! FARAH GRIFFIN: Fun fact. So it originated with Trump. [Laughter] SUNNY HOSTIN: I know, right? I have to say, Karen Dupiche our wonderful makeup artist, when the earthquake was happening, she put her coat on and she was, “Like, Jesus is coming. I'm out. I’m leaving. We got a solar eclipse. We got the earthquake.” SARA HAINES: She ran down the hallway. HOSTIN: She ran down the hallway. FARAH GRIFFIN: The rapture is here. HOSTIN: The rapture is here. And then also, I learned that the cicadas [mispronunciation] are coming. WHOOPI GOLDBERG: Cicadas. [Crosstalk] HOSTIN: Cicadas. For the first time in like 100 years, there’s two different kinds – GOLDBERG: No. No. No. No. No. No, No. No. That’s not – No. No. HOSTIN: Well, that is what I read. Two different kind of -- GOLDBERG: There's two different kinds of cicadas coming. HOSTIN: Yeah, two different times are coming. BEHAR: The good cicadas and the bad cicadas. GOLDBERG: No. HOSTIN: This is for the first time in many, many years. GOLDBERG: No. Every 17 years this happens. HOSTIN: Well, that's not what I read, but maybe, you know, maybe you know better. GOLDBERG: But either way -- HOSTIN: All those things together, would maybe lead one to believe that either climate change exists, or something is really going on. BEHAR: That’s more on point. FARAH GRIFFIN: Or Jesus is returning. BEHAR: Except earthquakes are not at the mercy of climate change. It's underground. It can’t. HOSTIN: How about the warming of the planet? GOLDBERG: No, it happens. And the eclipse, they've known about the eclipse coming because eclipses happen and they actually can say when these things are going to happen. So, all these folks who are saying, “You know, it's a sign from God,” God doesn't give you warning. Okay? You think he gave people at the Tower of Babble warning? “Oh, I'm about to jack y'all up.” No. God does stuff and then you figure, “Oh, that's probably because I just – uh” [pretends to die]. You know? I mean – It's -- No, but the cicadas come -- we have them every 17 years. There are some we get every 20-some-odd years and they just go under and they come back up, and now there's BEHAR: What do they do? GOLDBERG: They make noise and they have sex. SARA HAINES: And sing. HOSTIN: And this time both types are coming. BEHAR: They have sex? GOLDBERG: Yes. They make new cicadas. BEHAR: What's the noise when they’re having sex, “Oh god?” (…)

Cuomo: 'Hostages Have Become an Afterthought' to Biden, 'Unforgivable'

NewsNation primetime host Chris Cuomo dropped some major truth bombs on his eponymous show Thursday night; directly addressing the folks in the White House he’s been told “monitor” what he says and calling out how the American and Israeli hostages stolen by Hamas terrorists “have become an afterthought” to President Biden, who dropped them below reelection as a priority. He called it all “unforgivable.” At the top of his show, Cuomo noted “that people in the White House monitor what I say” and warned that since officials “won't come on the show,” he was “forced to speak at you rather than to you. This is not my choice.” Cuomo chided the Biden administration for their “half-speak” and “treating the war against Israel as if it were another political point of compromise.” He said the White House was using "appeasement in a situation that is not about balance” but “about realities.” “And I get how worried you are that you're not going have the same base year the last time. But that is not an excuse to be weak,” he directly shouted at Biden, who he declared had “forgotten” the hostages by not making their release the first condition of a ceasefire: There's a primary reality, okay? And we seemed to have forgotten it. Hamas is a terror organization. You designated them as that! They stole people. They need to give the people they stole back to us, to Israel, first! The hostages have become an afterthought! And that is wrong! And the reason it has happened is even more wrong! The reason it has happened is because other political exigencies and agendas have overtaken the relevance!     Cuomo rightfully dubbed the hostages “the most wrongfully injured victims in the entire situation,” and pointed out that Biden’s capitulation was evidence that Israel was receiving the short end of a double standard that benefited Hamas; one that the U.S. would not stand for if it was in Israel’s position (Click "expand"): Now. If Hamas gives back the hostages, which you would likely require as a sine qua non – without this nothing – in any other situation. Certainly if it were you in Israel's position. Then you have leverage. You have a basis for an exchange of wants. Not, “Stop, ceasefire, expose yourself, and then we hope to get the hostages back.” You wouldn't do that. You're asking Israel to do what you never would. And I don't know who else has: Pulling back under threat – existential threat, meaning they want you exterminated. And, by the way, you don't get your people back first. And it does feed the idea. I know you hear this, especially you, Tony. And I know I hear it cause I know who's talked to you about it. That it feeds this malignancy that Jews are treated differently. That Hamas is given more of a break, than your main ally. Why even mention ceasefire before they give back the hostages? The shellacking didn’t stop there. Looking directly into the camera, Cuomo declared that Biden was treating the war “like it's a debate about the debt ceiling. Like it’s brinksmanship. Lie it’s a fake deadline.” “There is too much blood on the floor for this to be about a typical compromise and you know it!” he exclaimed. Throughout his opening monologue, Cuomo spelled out how Biden was putting Israel in an impossible situation with his misplaced expectation for a ceasefire (Click "expand"): So stop treating this as if Israel should be the bigger person. They are convinced they were targeted for extermination. (…) You can provide no assurance that Israel would not be hit immediately because that's what Hamas has promised. That's what Hezbollah is doing. And the other Iranian proxies – now be honest – you have ignored. You have given Iran a pass. You have given them back billions of dollars. If you're going make Israel take on Iran for you, then at least give them a chance to be successful. (…) Enact a ceasefire immediately? Why, when they're not going to be safe? Cuomo kept the focus on the hostages, noting they “deserve the attention” and it’s “unforgivable” how they’ve been forgotten by the Biden administration. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: NewsNation’s Cuomo April 4, 2024 8:03:32 p.m. Eastern CHRIS CUOMO: I know that people in the White House monitor what I say. Good. And because President Biden and Secretary of State Blinken won't come on the show, I am forced to speak at you rather than to you. This is not my choice. I understand. Talk to people within your party at very high levels elected and unelected all the time. I know that the war in the Middle East is a major concern for you in the election. And I think that explains why you misplayed it the way you did today. Okay? You gave a mixed message. You talked tough in what sounded like a threat to your main ally in the region and then you said you're giving them more weapons. You're treating the war against Israel as if it were another political point of compromise. This is wrong, but this is wrong and we need to do better here in the has to be change and blah blah blah ceasefire. A lot of words. A lot of conditional language. A lot of half speak. A lot of appeasement in a situation that is not about balance. It is about realities. And I get the pressure from the left. I get it and I get how tight the race is. And I get how worried you are that you're not going have the same base year the last time. But that is not an excuse to be weak. There's a primary reality, okay? And we seemed to have forgotten it. Hamas is a terror organization. You designated them as that! They stole people. They need to give the people they stole back to us, to Israel, first! The hostages have become an afterthought! And that is wrong! And the reason it has happened is even more wrong! The reason it has happened is because other political exigencies and agendas have overtaken the relevance! The aid workers being hit. Horrible. Matters, of course. Deserves attention, absolutely. But also makes the lack of attention to the hostages apparent. Hitting the aid workers, angels among us is, of course, an acceptable. Everybody knows that. It also must be explained and you should have called for that explanation today, because, you know, they already know the reason this is a very sophisticated organization at the IDF. How can you focus on the aid workers who bravely took the risk to be there – angels among us. That's why I and the team are willing to risk going there to see their work in action so people can see the need. But if you're going to say that what happened to them demands action. How do you not start with the return of the hostages as the most wrongfully injured victims in the entire situation. Every time you speak about what must happen and you do not begin with, “Hey terrorists, give back who you stole,” you are giving terrorists a pass. Every time you don't start there, you lose the Israeli ear. Now. If Hamas gives back the hostages, which you would likely require as a sine qua non – without this nothing – in any other situation. Certainly if it were you in Israel's position. Then you have leverage. You have a basis for an exchange of wants. Not, “Stop, ceasefire, expose yourself, and then we hope to get the hostages back.” You wouldn't do that. You're asking Israel to do what you never would. And I don't know who else has: Pulling back under threat – existential threat, meaning they want you exterminated. And, by the way, you don't get your people back first. And it does feed the idea. I know you hear this, especially you, Tony. And I know I hear it cause I know who's talked to you about it. That it feeds this malignancy that Jews are treated differently. That Hamas is given more of a break, than your main ally. Why even mention ceasefire before they give back the hostages? Now, there's an obvious reason. Too much death in Gaza. Too many innocence dying in Gaza. Children dying, starving in Gaza. You are right. We must all agree. But what has the best chance of motivating a mitigation? Threats to Israel? Never. Political pressure on Bibi? He loves it. All the more reason to force the main want: get the hostages back. You know what response I get to this? “Yeah. You know, but Hams, they don't want to give them back. You know, they’re bad guys. They need the leverage.” Really? So, instead you want to force Israel to relent. Imagine how much stronger the message to Bibi would be if you came in saying, “We told Hamas they have until X to hand over the hostages or else. And when they do. You need to do X, Y, and Z.” The people in Gaza are calling for the release of the hostages more vehemently than you are. They know Hamas has put them in this Hell. What do you know? Then you have a basis for telling Israel there has to be change. Otherwise you're basically asking Israel to give Hamas the win and withdraw. It will not happen. You know this, which means you went in today saying those things to Bibi, having them reported when, you know, it's not going to happen, not under Bibi – Not under any one, if the surveys are to be believed. So stop treating this as if Israel should be the bigger person. They are convinced they were targeted for extermination. Stop treating this like it's a debate about the debt ceiling. Like it’s brinksmanship. Lie it’s a fake deadline. There is too much blood on the floor for this to be about a typical compromise and you know it! The place to push is obvious: Hostages. And with Israel: aid. Several reasons. It's the right thing to do as a moral authority. People are starving. It's bad and it makes Israel look bad. There is a less aid getting in them before October 7th and there is more need for it than ever. You are making a generation ready for radicalization and that's understandable. If all, you know, is a life of squalor in death. What do you think is going to happen? And they're going to blame America's much as Israel. This is also a chance to widen the role of other allies to make this more regional with players and more stakeholders, even if they're only monitoring and securing aid, which you can argue Israel should not be in sole control. And then you will have more reason to have peace because there's much more precedent of an international coalition monitoring humanitarian aid, than there is for asking for a withdrawal without any assurance of safety. You can provide no assurance that Israel would not be hit immediately because that's what Hamas has promised. That's what Hezbollah is doing. And the other Iranian proxies – now be honest – you have ignored. You have given Iran a pass. You have given them back billions of dollars. If you're going make Israel take on Iran for you, then at least give them a chance to be successful. This is not ending anytime soon. And you should tell the American people. It will likely get worse. And you should tell the American people. Aid is the place that makes the most sense that is most needed and has the best chance of making a positive difference. What you are saying today was a mixed message that made nothing better. It may have pleased your left flank that is hyper-sympathetic to the suffering in Gaza and there's nothing wrong with seeing the humanity in that. But that's not your job. Your job is to do something about it. And if you want to help it, stop deal with the suffering and do it smart. That's why you're running for office. And if you keep it like today, you're right. This issue may beat you. So, this is the news, right? Biden first call with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu since the aid workers were killed. And now they're saying, “strong rebuke.” What strong rebuke?! Enact a ceasefire immediately? Why, when they're not going to be safe? Look, I get it. I love the idea. Let's stop today, everybody go back to your corners, let's try to be reasonable. It's not going to happen. But the hostages deserve the attention. It is unforgivable how we have forgot. (…)

Hostin: The Rock Has ‘an Obligation’ to Endorse Biden for ‘Democracy!’

It’s very anti-democratic and hypocritical to demand someone endorse and vote for the candidate you were supporting all in the name “dEmOcRaCy,” which was why it came out of the mouth of The View’s staunchly racist and anti-Semitic co-host, Sunny Hostin (the descendant of slave owners) during Friday’s show. She was supported by the far-left ABC audience that booed and jeered Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson for going on Fox News and informing everyone he would not be endorsing President Biden this cycle. The audience proved how rabidly partisan and fickle they were throughout the segment, cheering wildly when his name was first mentioned and then pivoting to obnoxious revulsion when he wouldn’t back Biden (Click “expand”): BEHAR: So, this morning, besides the earthquake going on, on Fox & Friends, Dwayne "The rock" Johnson was asked about – [Audience hoots and hollers] BEHAR: He was asked about -- are his relatives here? What? (…) JOHNSON: The endorsement that I made years ago with Biden was one I thought was the best decision for me at that time. [Transition] Am I going to do that again this year, that answer is no. I'm not going to do that. Because what I realized what that caused back then was something that tears me up in my guts. Back then and now which is division. [Cuts back to live] BEHAR: So, a couple of questions. First of all— [Audience booing and jeering] ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: Maybe they're not his relatives.     Moderator Joy Behar’s take was that he shouldn’t be listened to because he went on Fox News for an interview. And with absolutely ZERO self-awareness, she rhetorically scoffed at listening to celebrity endorsements period. “So, first of all, should I pay any attention to who gives an interview on Fox where they lie every day? Number one. Number two, should celebrities publicly endorse public figures?” she asked the table.  “Now, is the time if you have a platform, you must be active. You must speak out…if you have a platform, you have an obligation,” she shouted. Self-proclaimed independent Sara Haines had the sane take. She argued that entertainers were not obligated to take sides and recalled comments from Country artist Reba McIntyre on keeping politics out of her performances: Reba McIntyre was the one, I think, who said once, “I don't want to speak about my politics because what I do is music and it's unifying. And when I go to a concert,” she goes, “I want everyone to feel welcome and together. I don’t want to divide anyone.” She also dismissed the idea that celebrity endorsements were required, arguing: “…it's so vapid to imagine just because someone says ‘I'm going to vote for this,’ that the sheep will fall in line and follow. That minimizes voters everywhere.” Co-host Ana Navarro also defended Johnson, proclaiming he’s “entitled to do whatever the hell [he] want[s].” She recounted when, during the 2000 election cycle, Johnson made appearances at both the Republican and Democratic conventions with the goal of promoting voting in general. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View April 5, 2024 11:15:10 a.m. Eastern JOY BEHAR: So, this morning, besides the earthquake going on, on Fox & Friends, Dwayne "The rock" Johnson was asked about – [Audience hoots and hollers] SUNNY HOSTIN: Yeah. BEHAR: He was asked about -- are his relatives here? What? [Laughter] He was asked about putting his weight behind Joe Biden in the last election. So, watch. [Cuts to video] DWAYNE “THE ROCK” JOHNSON: Am I happy with the state of America right now? Well, that answer is no. Do I believe we're going to get better? I believe in that. I'm an optimistic guy and I believe we can get better. [Transition] The endorsement that I made years ago with Biden was one I thought was the best decision for me at that time. [Transition] Am I going to do that again this year, that answer is no. I'm not going to do that. Because what I realized what that caused back then was something that tears me up in my guts. Back then and now which is division. [Cuts back to live] BEHAR: So, a couple of questions. First of all— [Audience booing and jeering] ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: Maybe they're not his relatives. HOSTIN: Yeah. BEHAR: So, first of all, should I pay any attention to who gives an interview on Fox where they lie every day? Number one. Number two, should celebrities publicly endorse public figures? [Audience shouting “no”] Or they should keep their politics to themselves? ANA NAVARRO: If they want to. I mean, celebrities are U.S. citizens – are American citizens with a -- you don't lose your rights as a citizen because you are a celebrity. But, you know, I remember -- I'm so old like I was telling Molly today, I said I remember being at a Republican convention where The Rock spoke and I remember him being at the DNC. It was in the year 2000 in Philadelphia and when he spoke, he wasn't there. It was George W. Bush that was getting the nomination. He wasn't there endorsing. He was there raising awareness for voting and getting young people and his followers to be involved. BEHAR: Like Taylor Swift is -- NAVARRO: Yeah. So look. I think for him the cause of division aspect is a real one. He also went to the DNC that year. And I think everybody is entitled to do whatever the hell they want. HOSTIN: And I think – You know, he's been quite political. I agree with you and he's been very engaged and very involved. I do think we're living in a time where we have someone running for president that is an existential threat to democracy. Right? [Audience cheering, shouting “yes”] That is where we are at, someone who has been -- has 88, you know, criminal charges, four indictment, someone that has vowed to be a dictator on the very first day he takes office. Now, is the time if you have a platform, you must be active. You must speak out. That's how I feel, and I generally don't – [Applause] I generally don't think that celebrities should be forced to be politically active. BEHAR: Not forced. You have a platform. – HOSTIN: But right now, if you have a platform, you have an obligation. SARA HAINES: Reba McIntyre was the one, I think, who said once, “I don't want to speak about my politics because what I do is music and it's unifying. And when I go to a concert,” she goes, “I want everyone to feel welcome and together. I don’t want to divide anyone.” BEHAR: She can do it at the end of the show. [Laughter] HAINES: Point is there are activists people who are entertainers, Kerry Washington, is a self-proclaimed “I’m an activist.” You have Jane Fonda, activist. When you're not an activist and happen to have a big platform I think encouraging people to vote is the most important part, because I think it's so vapid to imagine just because someone says ‘I'm going to vote for this,’ that the sheep will fall in line and follow. That minimizes voters everywhere. So, I don't think it matters who they're voting for. Its public participation is the important part. [Applause] (…)

Winner Take All: CNN Panics Over Nebraska Looking to Join 48 States

CNN’s Inside Politics was in a panic on Thursday over the “entirely possible” scenario that President Biden’s reelection (and thus the fate of America, the world, the known universe, the multiverse, and humanity’s re-admittance into Eden) hinged on one electoral vote in Nebraska. Meanwhile, the state’s proposed shift to a winner-take-all system for electoral college votes would put it in line with 48 other states, or 96 percent of states. “Now, imagine this: a 269 to 269 tie in the electoral college that could become much more likely if Nebraska changes how it awards electoral votes. This week, Donald Trump and his allies are pressuring state lawmakers to do just that,” host Dana Bash fretted, trying to stoke fear in viewers. Breaking down why she was so paranoid, Bash explained that Nebraska and Maine were the only two states in the union that proportioned electoral college votes based on congressional districts. “Switching to a winner-take-all system could strip Biden of an electoral vote that he won in 2020. And this election could very well come down to that single electoral college vote,” she said, betraying that her fear was a victory for former President Trump. CNN national political reporter Daniel Strauss tried to talk Bash off the ledge by noting that advocates for the switch were struggling with a number of procedural hurdles (Click “expand”): Just that this is a big hurdle for advocates of changing the way Nebraska allocates delegates are trying to overcome. And part of it is just the very fact that this is how they've done it in Nebraska for a while now. It's very apparent to Democrats that there is a scenario where this election is super close and it comes down to how Nebraska allocates votes. And they obviously don't want to give an advantage to Donald Trump, that would swing the election against them. At the same time though, this bill is just running into all kinds of legislative and very technical hurdles, including that it wasn't blessed with a priority cert label that in the Nebraska legislature is acquired at this point in their cycle for moving a bill forward.     “This is really important because Democrats and Republicans have been saying throughout this cycle, ‘This can be a very close election.’ It really could come down to just a few electoral votes,” he added. Insisting it was “not out of the realm of possibility at all,” Bash put up a couple of electoral maps to spook viewers about a 269-269 split: If Joe Biden wins, that Nebraska vote, that one electoral vote and he wins back again, wins the so-called blue wall, Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, you have 270 to 268, so he wins the presidency. Now, let's see this scenario where that Nebraska law is changed. 269 to 269, an electoral college tie. Seemingly unfamiliar with the constitutional rules about an electoral college tie, Strauss lamented that such a situation “goes to a whole different arena and it puts us into a morass that we don't usually experience in electoral and campaign politics. Uh, that's why -- And this is entirely possible.” What they seemingly didn’t want to disclose to viewers was that in the event of a tie, House delegations vote to elect the president. And according to 270ToWin, “Republicans hold a 26-22 edge in House delegations.” “We've seen in the past few election cycles at the blue wall is breachable and that states that are usually Republican-leaning can be flipped: Arizona and Georgia,” Strauss added. “So, it really could come down to a few electoral votes. And it could come down to one congressional district in Nebraska.” The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: CNN’s Inside Politics April 4, 2024 12:44:19 p.m. Eastern DANA BASH: Now, imagine this: a 269 to 269 tie in the electoral college that could become much more likely if Nebraska changes how it awards electoral votes. This week, Donald Trump and his allies are pressuring state lawmakers to do just that. Right now, it is one of two states that awards some of its electoral votes by congressional district. The other is the state of Maine. Switching to a winner take all system could strip Biden of an electoral vote that he won in 2020. And this election could very well come down to that single electoral college vote. CNN's Daniel Strauss is digging into this. Daniel, what are you learning? DANIEL STRAUSS: Just that this is a big hurdle for advocates of changing the way Nebraska allocates delegates are trying to overcome. And part of it is just the very fact that this is how they've done it in Nebraska for a while now. It's very apparent to Democrats that there is a scenario where this election is super close and it comes down to how Nebraska allocates votes. And they obviously don't want to give an advantage to Donald Trump, that would swing the election against them. At the same time though, this bill is just running into all kinds of legislative and very technical hurdles, including that it wasn't blessed with a priority cert label that in the Nebraska legislature is acquired at this point in their cycle for moving a bill forward. Look, Dana, though. This is -- This is really important because Democrats and Republicans have been saying throughout this cycle, “this can be a very close election.” It really could come down to just a few electoral votes, a few thousand votes in states that otherwise really aren't – haven't been attended to by either the big campaigns. BASH: Let's give our viewers a scenario here that is, again, not out of the realm of possibility at all. If Joe Biden wins, that Nebraska vote, that one electoral vote and he wins back again, wins the so-called blue wall, Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, you have 270 to 268, so he wins the presidency. Now, let's see this scenario where that Nebraska law is changed. 269 to 269, an electoral college tie. STRAUSS: Right. Which goes to a whole different arena and it puts us into a morass that we don't usually experience in electoral and campaign politics. Uh, that's why -- And this is entirely possible. We've seen in the past few election cycles at the blue wall is breachable and that states that are usually Republican leaning can be flipped: Arizona and Georgia. So, it really could come down to a few electoral votes. And it could come down to one congressional district in Nebraska. BASH: Absolute – Absolutely fascinating. And we are gonna be watching to see what the Nebraska legislature does. Thanks so much for bringing this to us. Appreciate it.

Tapper Takes on Role of Dem Party Strategist, Urges Abandoning Israel for Votes

Radio host Mark Levin said it best Wednesday night when he noted that “the Democrat Party will sell its proverbial soul for 10,000 votes.” Much was the case on that evening’s edition of The Lead with Jake Tapper on CNN, when Tapper took on the role of party campaign strategist to urge the Biden administration to abandon Israel in its war against genocidal Hamas terrorists in order to secure pro-Hamas voters in Michigan and Wisconsin. In an interview with Ben Wikler, the chairman of the Wisconsin Democratic Party, Tapper was in a panic over the 46,000 pro-Hamas voters who cast “uninstructed” protest votes against President Biden earlier in the week. Tapper was particularly concerned that those protest votes would carry over to November, hurting Biden in the general election and possibly handing former President Trump the victory. He warned Wikler that those people could vote for a third-party candidate; and with a rhetorical but rather obvious wink-wink-nudge-nudge, Tapper declared that “privately” he and Wikler were on the same page: So, let me posit another theory, maybe there's 46,000 people, because they are super engaged, they would turn out and vote basically a protest vote, even though President Biden is going to be the nominee, they didn't need to do that, but there are motivated and they're engaged as you say. Let's say they go and they vote for Jill Stein or Cornell West or Robert Kennedy Jr. I take your point they're not going to vote for Trump, but I if I were you and I'm sure you're very smart guy and well-respected. I'm sure. Privately, you agree with me, at least. These 46,000 or not necessarily going to vote for Joe Biden.     “Oh, no one’s saying anyone's necessarily voting for anyone. I don't think any candidate should take any voter for granted,” Wikler stated. “So, there's absolutely work to do to show voters that their voices are for being heard. And most importantly, addressed the wrenching humanitarian crisis that's playing out before our eyes on CNN and everywhere else.” Later in the show, Tapper praised far-left extremist and CNN colleague Nina Turner for her radical analysis that Biden needed to abandon another Middle East ally to terrorists: Let's talk about that because former Ohio State Senator Nina Turner today posted on X regarding the Wisconsin primary and what I was talking with Mr. Wikler about. Yesterday, she wrote, “Over 47,000 voters in Wisconsin went to the polls and voted uninstructed.” That's 47,000 Democratic voters, we should note. “President Biden won Wisconsin in 2020 by a little over 20,000 votes. This president must decide if loyalty to Netanyahu is worth delivering Trump the election in November. He must decide.” “I love her,” he proclaimed. “She's a firebrand, she's a progressive. But there are moderate Democrats saying that privately, too.” Tapper also suggested that the Biden campaign should be courting Never Trump Republicans and former GOP candidates and have them join him on the campaign trail. “Um, shouldn't the Biden campaign and the White House be going after people like Liz Cheney and like I understand, you know, and saying I know you don't agree with me on 99 percent of these issues, but you agree with me on democracy,” he argued. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: CNN’s The Lead April 3, 2024 5:06:28 p.m. Eastern (…) JAKE TAPPER: So, let me posit another theory, maybe there's 46,000 people, because they are super engaged, they would turn out and vote basically a protest vote, even though President Biden is going to be the nominee, they didn't need to do that, but there are motivated and they're engaged as you say. Let's say they go and they vote for Jill Stein or Cornell West or Robert Kennedy Jr. I take your point they're not going to vote for Trump, but I if I were you and I'm sure you're very smart guy and well-respected. I'm sure. Privately, you agree with me, at least. These 46,000 or not necessarily going to vote for Joe Biden. BEN WIKLER (Wisconsin Democratic Party, chair): Oh, no one’s saying anyone's necessarily voting for anyone. I don't think any candidate should take any voter for granted. So, there's absolutely work to do to show voters that their voices are for being heard. And most importantly, addressed the wrenching humanitarian crisis that's playing out before our eyes on CNN and everywhere else. The thing that will bring voters together is changed on the ground in Israel and Palestine. (…) 5:09:24 p.m. Eastern TAPPER: Um, shouldn't the Biden campaign and the White House be going after people like Liz Cheney and like I understand, you know, and saying I know you don't agree with me on 99 percent of these issues, but you agree with me on democracy. I mean, isn't there a case to be made? MATT GORMAN (fmr. Tim Scott pres. Campaign advisor): It would seem natural in a way. Jonathan Martin's piece might have blown it a little bit because now he has to wait a little bit. He can't go right afterwards because it's like, well, I'm taking cues from Jonathan Martin. But I think it would probably be a smart thing. I don't think it would be receptive if Nikki Haley did it or if it was two Nikki Haley per se, Chris Christie. Liz Cheney, on the other hand, maybe so. (…) 5:10:28 p.m. Eastern TAPPER: Let's talk about that, because former Ohio State Senator Nina Turner today posted on X regarding the Wisconsin primary and what I was talking with Mr. Wikler about. Yesterday, she wrote, “Over 47,000 voters in Wisconsin went to the polls and voted uninstructed.” That's 47,000 Democratic voters, we should note. “President Biden won Wisconsin in 2020 by a little over 20,000 votes. This president must decide if loyalty to Netanyahu is worth delivering Trump the election in November. He must decide.” Nina Turner, I love her. She's a firebrand, she's a progressive. But there are moderate Democrats saying that privately, too. (…)

Pro-Terror? Sunny Hostin Demands U.S. Abandon Israel, Give Hamas the W

The View’s staunchly racist and anti-Semitic co-host, Sunny Hostin (the descendant of slave owners) came off as rather pro-Hamas during Wednesday’s edition of the show as she demanded that the United States abandon Israel and allow them to lose the war; giving the win to the genocidal terrorists. The ABC co-host also didn’t seem to care about the Israeli and American hostages being held hostage by Hamas. Hostin’s anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism flared during a discussion where the rest of the cast was commending Hillary Clinton for telling the pro-Hamas voters in Michigan and Wisconsin to get over themselves and vote for President Biden. Speaking “as an Arab-American,” faux conservative Alyssa Farah Griffin didn’t like Clinton’s verbiage but argued: “[Y]ou really think Donald Trump would handle Gaza better than Joe Biden? If he thought, it was politically advantageous he would level Gaza without a second thought.” Co-host Joy Behar warned that the Trump administration negotiated peace in the Middle East via “the Abraham Accords and he moved the United States embassy to Jerusalem. So, he is the most pro-Israel president running right now, more than Biden.” What Hostin took issue with was how the rest of the cast thought it was an easy decision for the pro-Hamas voters to side with Biden over Trump. “I don't think you can tell people whose families have been killed; whole entire lines of their families have been murdered, over 32,000 people, women and children, the majority that, ‘well, but if Trump wins it would be [worse],’” she decried.     Siding with the United Nations against America and Israel (and citing them as if they had any moral authority on anything), Hostin insisted the U.S. was “complicit” with “murder.” “[T]hat is because the United States sends $3.8 billion worth of aid to Israel and that also including arming them,” she whined. Citing unnamed “social sciences,” Hostin argued that, “if the United States stopped providing that aid, the war would be over…in three days.” The outcome she was advocating for in that scenario would allow Hamas to survive, regroup, and essentially give them a victory. In a surprisingly snappy rebuttal, Behar shot back with: “You know when the war would be over? If Hamas would release the hostages. That's when the war would be over, Sunny.” Hostin did see hope for her anti-Israel fantasy: “I think Joe Biden is listening, because now at the U.N., my understanding is that while they have voted for a ceasefire, the United States instead of vetoing that vote, they just abstained. And so there is movement. I think that pressure is working.” Questioning the “humanity” of those who disagreed with her, Hostin also falsely claimed the Israeli Defense Forces were intentionally targeting and killing humanitarian aid workers. “We had Jose Andres on our show who said, food and water is a human right. His very foundation was targeted by the Israeli government and seven people died,” she falsely shouted. “They weren't targeted…That's actually a mistake,” co-host Sara Haines pushed back. Haines also praised Clinton’s chides of Biden’s critics. “It is really nice to watch Hillary Clinton not hold back,” she boasted. “So, I get what she's saying but at this point it is ‘get over yourself!’ It's a bipartisan system and you cannot change it!” The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View April 3, 2024 11:03:46 a.m. Eastern (…) ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: Here's the thing, based on Michigan and Wisconsin results we know that the protest vote, the sort of ceasefire kind of votes in Michigan, were more than the margin of victory that Joe Biden won Michigan in 2020. So, this is very real. And I think you have a right, I believe a protest vote is part of democracy. I think it's a good way to make your voice heard, but I would say to these folks and these are Democrat, I'm a Republican, take it or leave it. But as an Arab-American you really think Donald Trump would handle Gaza better than Joe Biden? If he thought, it was politically advantageous he would level Gaza without a second thought. And I think, unfortunately, we live in a binary world. I’m conflicted right now because I don't like either option. But you have to think what are the long-term repercussions for what matters most to you. And I think it would be a mistake for these folks to sit it out because it’s not in their interest. JOY BEHAR: People need to understand he [Donald Trump] negotiated the Abraham Accords and he moved the United States embassy to Jerusalem. So, he is the most pro-Israel president running right now, more than Biden. So, these people on the left who are protesting that they should, at least, know that which is what you're saying and I'm just reiterating it. FARAH GRIFFIN: And I just want to correct; it's approaching Biden's margin of victory in Michigan. It's 100,000 votes. (…) 11:07:04 a.m. Eastern BEHAR: Now, these people who are on the fence, what are you thinking?! This is what Hillary is trying to say to people. What are you thinking?! There is no choice here! You have a man, Joe Biden is a good person. He understands grief. He's lost a child. He's lost two children. He lost a wife. He's compassionate. He feels for Americans. This guy [Trump], he's a psychopath. SARA HAINES: It is really nice to watch Hillary Clinton not hold back. And for this reason, we are seeing more actual Hillary Clinton since she stopped running and actively participating as a candidate herself. She’s literally saying, obviously, like it's a privilege to have more parties – I as an independent really wish we had more parties in general, not this election. So, I get what she's saying but at this point it is ‘get over yourself!’ It's a bipartisan system and you cannot change it! FARAH GRIFFIN: I don't think that's going to work with Michigan with really, really angry voters. And I'm on the other side of the conflict. HAINES: But the point you made about Trump being pro-Israel – really quick, Sunny. He also wouldn't send aid at all. So, it's not just that he would annihilate Gaza and everywhere else, he would be saying don't even put trucks in there so they will get -- anyone pushing back on Biden's take is going to get ten times worse with Donald Trump. SUNNY HOSTIN: That's right but I don't think you can tell people whose families have been killed; whole entire lines of their families have been murdered, over 32,000 people, women and children, the majority that, ‘well, but if Trump wins it would be better.’ The problem here is – HAINES: It would be worse. BEHAR: It would be worse. HOSTIN: It would be worse. WHOOPI GOLDBERG: Worse. HOSTIN: The problem here is that they are making themselves known. Michigan has about 200,000 Muslim voters. They are losing their family members. And the United States, the U.N. has found is complicit in that; and that is because the United States sends $3.8 billion worth of aid to Israel and that also including arming them. Social sciences have found that if the United States stopped providing that aid, the war would be over – FARAH GRIFFIN: To be clear, the Israelis are – HOSTIN: Let me just finish this. The war would be over in three days. BEHAR: You know when the war would be over? If Hamas would release the hostages. That's when the war would be over, Sunny. [Crosstalk] HOSTIN: No. But the issue is, those votes matter -- will matter, and I think Joe Biden is listening, because now at the U.N., my understanding is that while they have voted for a ceasefire, the United States instead of vetoing that vote, they just abstained. And so there is movement. I think that pressure is working. And I think if you have any shred of humanity, you must understand that those people are losing their entire families, lines and lines of families, and it's a humanitarian crisis. We had Jose Andres on our show who said, food and water is a human right. GOLDBERG: Yes. HOSTIN: His very foundation was targeted by the Israeli government and seven people died. HAINES: They weren't targeted. [inaudible] That's actually a mistake. (…)

Carville: ‘Idiotic’ for Biden Care, Modify Plans for Slain NY Officer

Democratic strategist James Carville was spinning his wheels on NewsNation Monday night as he tried to defend President Biden’s callus neglect of slain NYPD officer Jonathan Diller who was being laid to rest not far from his star-studded, elitist fundraiser at Radio City Music Hall. In trying to defend Biden from the rather tame criticism from host Chris Cuomo and correspondent at-large Geraldo Rivera, Carville proclaimed it would be “idiotic” for Biden to do anything in response to the officer’s death that evening. After literally laughing at Rivera’s criticism of Biden, Carville proclaimed it “idiotic” for Biden to think about modifying his plans for the fundraiser. His reasoning? He had money to collect and cops get shot all time: Well, I think I think it’s idiotic. And I'll tell you why. They have a fundraiser scheduled. They have Radio City Music Hall, they’re out there raising money, they got guest lists, they got everything, done. Unfortunately, it happens about 120 times a year, a police officer was shot. And you’re really saying they just should un-ring the entire bell? Okay. Interestingly, on Tuesday, NewsNation highlighted a 2024 press release from the National Fraternal Order of Police that put the number of officers shot in the line of duty in 2023 at more than triple Carville’s estimate. “Instead, 378 officers were shot in the line of duty in 2023, the highest number the FOP has ever recorded,” the press release said.     Carville was determined to paint critics as unreasonable; putting words in Cuomo and Rivera’s mouths by suggesting the only solution was to just call of the fundraiser entirely. Cuomo pushed back by noting how easy of a “layup” modifying his plans would have been, but Carville had a meltdown: CARVILLE: So, you really think that should just call the fundraiser off? Just called it off? It’s insane. Of course not. CUOMO: No, no, no, James. That was an easy one. It’s a layup. The answer is both. You stop by. You see the family. You give them some private moments. You get back in the car. You go to the fundraiser. That's the that's not a stretch. And I get it. I get why they didn’t do it. I get it James, I get it. CARVILLE: I profoundly disagree. I understand. CUOMO: I totally get it. CARVILLE: You’re a free speech guy. You want your guests and free speech. I think the entire thing about the fundraiser and a transgender thing is just borderline idiotic. Certain events – you have confluence events campaigns don’t control everything. Rivera’s “minimal effort” idea didn’t even involve Biden going to see the family, but just sharing his condolences at the fundraiser, which he didn’t care to do either. “It would have been so easy. James, you could have crafted it easily,” he tried to stroke Carville’s ego. Carville bizarrely retreated to using the number of cops killed in the line of duty as some sort of morbid defense. “Again, unfortunately, it is not uncommon for peace officer to be killed in the line of duty. Okay?” he huffed. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: NewsNation’s Cuomo April 1, 2024 8:10:30 p.m. Eastern (…) CHRIS CUOMO: James. When you're done laughing. JAMES CARVILLE: Well, I think I think it’s idiotic. And I'll tell you why. They have a fundraiser scheduled. They have Radio City Music Hall, they’re out there raising money, they got guest lists, they got everything, done. Unfortunately, it happens about 120 times a year, a police officer was shot. And you’re really saying they just should un-ring the entire bell? Okay. And this whole thing about March 31st every year it's on March 31st. And I think there this whole outrage machine and this whole false equivalency machine that says we – [indiscernible noises]. By the way, when you get mocked Saturday Night Live, I don't know Geraldo, that a pretty culturally significant program to me. (…) 8:12:27 p.m. Eastern CUOMO: It is April Fool's Day, and I have to tell you I never thought— CARVILLE: So, you really think that should just call the fundraiser off? Just called it off? It’s insane. Of course not. CUOMO: No, no, no, James. That was an easy one. It’s a layup. The answer is both. You stop by. You see the family. You give them some private moments. You get back in the car. You go to the fundraiser. That's the that's not a stretch. And I get it. I get why they didn’t do it. I get it James, I get it. CARVILLE: I profoundly disagree. I understand. CUOMO: I totally get it. CARVILLE: You’re a free speech guy. You want your guests and free speech. I think the entire thing about the fundraiser and a transgender thing is just borderline idiotic. Certain events – you have confluence events campaigns don’t control everything. I don't even think anyone knew about the transgender proclamation. I worked in the mayor's office, they have proclamations every other day. Same thing in the White House. I mean, that's just not the way the world works. And the idea a sleet Biden is come kind of cultural liberal. CUOMO: James, it has to be the way the world works because it's happening right now. [Crosstalk] GERALDO RIVERA: Stephen Colbert – Here’s how you fix it with minimal effort and you make people feel better. Stephen Colbert opens the program, “New Yorkers are in mourning now we have lost one of finest. We obviously we didn't know this tragedy was going to happen when we scheduled is event. But President Biden, do want to say something about law and order, crime and punishment, the risk that police officers and their families endure?” It would have been so easy. James, you could have crafted it easily. CARVILLE: I – you know – Again, unfortunately, it is not uncommon for peace officer to be killed in the line of duty. Okay? That's just one of these – Actually, think it's a little bit down now, but I looked at the statistics and it doesn’t happened every day but – [Crosstalk] CUOMO: But James, it was an opportunity. CARVILLE: Okay. All right. Seriously, were outrage is missed – You know, I can tell Stephen Colbert how to do its job. [Stammering] CUOMO: James, you’re among friends. CARVILLE: I think the whole thing – CUOMO: You’re welcome to disagree. CARVILLE: I understand. CUOMO: I am happy that you are disagreeing. CARVILLE: But I am totally unpersuaded that there was anything wrong with this. That’s all. CUOMO: I understand. CARVILLE: We’ll agree to disagree. CUOMO: Perception is reality. (…)

The View Defends Decapitating Trump, Decries Hog-Tied Biden Decal

In their first live show after the Easter weekend, the leftist extremists of ABC’s The View kicked off their Tuesday show enraged that former President Trump reposted a “violent image” of a truck decal featuring a fake image of President Biden alive and hog-tied in the bed. But in the midst of their pearl-clutching, the cast defended their friend Kathy Griffin’s photoshoot holding up an effigy of Trump’s bloody severed head; suggesting she simply “did what she does as a comic.” “You-know-who spent the most sacred weekend on the Catholic calendar posting rants about the judge in his New York fraud case making false claims about the judge's daughter and reposting a violent image of President Biden that we are not going to show you here today,” moderator Whoopi Goldberg indignantly proclaimed. She demanded to know: “Why does he keep getting away with it?” She called the truck decal “so violent” and asked: “What's the difference between what Kathy Griffin did and what he did? I don't understand.” Realizing they were essentially attacking their friend, who was on the show just last week, co-host Joy Behar argued that “it’s worse” for Trump to share such images because Griffin was just “a comedian.” Goldberg also defended Griffin’s ‘comedy’ and suggested that Trump should get a visit from the Secret Service like she did. Staunchly racist and anti-Semitic co-host, Sunny Hostin (the descendant of slave owners) hinted that anything less was somehow evidence of a two-tiered justice system:     GOLDBERG: She did what she does as a comic but are the Secret Service going to be visiting him and giving him a warning about putting violent imagery? SUNNY HOSTIN: Well, they should. GOLDBERG: Why wouldn't they? HOSTIN: Everyone should be treated equally under the law. GOLDBERG: We keep saying that. HOSTIN: And we keep on saying that. The View cast still refused to explain what the punchline to Griffin’s so-called “joke” was, much like when Behar claimed liberal extremist Jane Fonda was “just kidding” when she called for the “murder” of all pro-lifers on the show. Hostin went on to lament how “We're missing…the Obama statesmanship” and how “Trump has given people permission, license to be politically violent.” In reality, The View encouraged their fellow liberal extremists to target the homes of the conservative justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, which culminated in an assassination attempt on Justice Kavanaugh and his family. They then decried calls for increased security after the attack. They’ve also downplayed terrorist attacks against pro-life organizations. The audience was also treated to another one of Behar’s revisionist history lessons when she claimed: “...if you know history political violence precedes a fascist dictatorship,” as if when communists came to power it was a peaceful transition. Even the American Revolution had political violence in the form of the tar and feathering of British officials. In February, Joy “I know history” Behar claimed NATO was the military alliance that fought Hitler and the Nazis. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View April 2, 2024 11:02:13 a.m. Eastern WHOOPI GOLDBERG: You-know-who spent the most sacred weekend on the Catholic calendar posting rants about the judge in his New York fraud case making false claims about the judge's daughter and reposting a violent image of President Biden that we are not going to show you here today. These rants violate the court's gag order, so why does he keep getting away with it? I mean, that image is so violent. What's the difference between what Kathy Griffin did and what he did? I don't understand. [Applause] JOY BEHAR: It's worse for him really. GOLDBERG: Well, I mean – BEHAR: She's a comedian. GOLDBERG: She did what she does as a comic but are the Secret Service going to be visiting him and giving him a warning about putting violent imagery? SUNNY HOSTIN: Well, they should. GOLDBERG: Why wouldn't they. HOSTIN: Everyone should be treated equally under the law. GOLDBERG: We keep saying that. HOSTIN: And we keep on saying that. And that's what I was supported of the bond he got sort of being – uh-oh. Someone is speaking to us. The lights are flickering. GOLDBERG: Does anybody else see the lighting flickering? Okay. Okay. HOSTIN: I was supportive of the fact that his bond -- did you do anything bad this weekend, Whoopi? What's going on? [Laughter] I was very supportive of the fact that the bond was lowered because I think that that's how you would treat everyone equally, you know, bonds are supposed to not be punitive. But I will say this, you know, Trump has given people permission, license to be politically violent. BEHAR: Yeah. HOSTIN: And this is from the very, very beginning. He was campaigning for the presidency. He even said somewhere I think if you find him, you know, hurt that person. Punch them, punch the hell out of them and I will pay for it. I will pay for your defense. And so what we're missing now is this -- the statesmanship that we've always been used to, you know, the presidential office being above reproach. We're missing, in my opinion, the Obama statesmanship, we’re missing the Clinton statesmanship, the Hillary Clinton statesmanship and its behavior that seems to come from the top down. People are saying, “Well, it's the January 6th folks.” It's even worse when it comes from the president or the potential president of the United States of America. [Applause] BEHAR: Well, it seems to me if you know history political violence precedes a fascist dictatorship. GOLDBEGR: Always. BEHAR: I mean, just look at World War II and you will a see. The Nazi thugs were beating up Jews in the street and everyone just looked the other way, and then we had Hitler and millions were killed. I'm not saying that's going to happen here but I'm just saying that there's political violence does precede a fascist country. (…)

Stephanopoulos Uses Kennedy Cult Doc to Campaign Against Trump/RFK Jr.

The Kennedy family has a cult following in the Democratic Party and an endorsement from them has been viewed as critical in the primaries, hence the left’s concern with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. running for president as an independent against President Biden. This meant that irony levels were off the charts on Monday’s Good Morning America when ABC anchor George Stephanopoulos utilized Rory Kennedy’s cult documentary to campaign against former President Donald Trump and her brother Bobby. On the show to hawk her new HBO documentary about the Synanon cult, Stephanopoulos queued Kennedy to draw parallels between the cult’s founder, Charles Dederich Sr., and Trump. “And you also say that we are seeing the kind of dynamic we saw in Synanon with a cult-like leader playing out in our politics today,” he stated. Of course, Kennedy obliged: Well, I think so. I think we are seeing the cult personality. And what I have learned in making this documentary [The Synanon Fix] is that in times where there's uncertainty and it feels precarious, the world around us, that people are drawn to alternative models. There are supposedly 10,000 cults in the United States today. So, I think there's a lot of people who are drawn to different leadership and being pulled into ideas that maybe aren't consistent with their moral compass. “And I think we can learn a lot from this program about what's happening in the world today,” she added.     It’s incredibly hypocritical for a Kennedy to chide others for “cult-like” behavior. The Kennedys have been treated like royalty in the Democratic Party for decades and their political endorsements, handed out from the family compound, have been coveted. The media put a lot of weight on them to, trumpeting their endorsements of candidates Obama and Biden like a new pope was selected. And for the liberal media, describing something as a “cult” was actually good when it was used for Democrats. In 2019, NPR anchor Audie Cornish praised Obama as the “ultimate cult of personality candidate.” For his final question, Stephanopoulos teed Kennedy up to attack her brother’s campaign. “Your brother, of course, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is running for president right now. You say this is the most important election of our lifetime and that a vote for your brother is actually dangerous?” he wondered. “Well, my biggest concern with Bobby's run is that he is going to take votes away from Biden,” Kennedy said. “And I think this election is going to come down to a handful of votes and a handful of states. And I am concerned that voting for Bobby is going to take votes from Biden and lead to a Trump election. And I am very concerned what that will do to our country and to the world over the ensuing four years.” Stephanopoulos’s enthusiasm to for the cult mudslinging was rich in its own right since he was a lackey for President Clinton. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s Good Morning America April 1, 2024 8:42:52 a.m. Eastern (…) GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: And you also say that we are seeing the kind of dynamic we saw in Synanon with a cult-like leader playing out in our politics today. RORY KENNEDY: Well, I think so. I think we are seeing the cult personality. And what I have learned in making this documentary [The Synanon Fix] is that in times where there's uncertainty and it feels precarious, the world around us, that people are drawn to alternative models. There are supposedly 10,000 cults in the United States today. So, I think there's a lot of people who are drawn to different leadership and being pulled into ideas that maybe aren't consistent with their moral compass. And I think we can learn a lot from this program about what's happening in the world today. STEPHANOPOULOS: One other question about what's happening in the world today, before you go. Your brother, of course, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is running for president right now. You say this is the most important election of our life time and that a vote for your brother is actually dangerous? KENNEDY: Well, my biggest concern with Bobby's run is that he is going to take votes away from Biden. And I think this election is going to come down to a handful of votes and a handful of states. And I am concerned that voting for Bobby is going to take votes from Biden and lead to a Trump election. And I am very concerned what that will do to our country and to the world over the ensuing four years. STEPHANOPOULOS: Rory, thanks for coming on today.

The View: The Poors Need to Stop Caring About Affording Food

No, it wasn’t an April Fool’s joke. During Monday’s pre-taped edition of ABC’s The View, the liberal ladies whined about average Americans who worried about making ends meet and being able to afford food under the weight of Bidenomics. They seriously argued that Americans were better off under President Biden than they were under President Trump, and brought on a millionaire actress to downplay the struggles of average Americans. The cast was triggered by a Republican Party campaign message asking the electorally famous question: “are you better off than you were four years ago?” The question was meant to have people ponder how well things had improved from the start of a president’s first term. But since four years ago was the heart of the pandemic, The View pounced. “So, why is it that some people are having short memory issues? There are plenty of other reasons to feel good about where we actually are. So, why isn't that tracking?” moderator Whoopi Goldberg lamented to the rest of the table. Faux conservative Alyssa Farah Griffin proclaimed that “Republicans are committing malpractice” by daring to ask if things were better under Biden than her old boss. “Four years ago we were literally hoarding toilet paper, like let’s just remember that!” she huffed. She eventually admitted that the GOP message was in regards to “pre-pandemic” America. “They think, I had more money in my 401K, the economy was doing well, there were market gains. As juxtaposed to now,” she said, before quickly trying to appease the cast by proclaiming: “the economy is objectively doing better by most macro measures.”     Adding: “…but there's this huge issue of grocery price that voters feel. So, that’s kind of what’s going on there.” Running cover for the Biden administration, pretend independent Sara Haines tried to suggest she understood what average Americans were going through in struggling to put food on the table, but suggested inflation was out of Biden’s hands: I know that the economy, again, day-to-day, especially for people living check-to-check, you're not going to feel the recovery even though the numbers are on the way up, because even after the Great Depression, it took 11 years. People recover faster than economies do. It takes a long time. This is a global problem. It's not unique to the U.S. right now. Of course, she never addressed the obvious cognitive dissonance that: if inflation was out of Biden’s control, why should he be given credit for the improvements that were supposedly happening? The other faux conservative, Ana Navarro parroted the New York Times’ smear that Americans had “amnesia” about the Trump presidency and boasted: “...the Republicans asking this question gave an opening for Democrats to remind the country where we were four years ago.” The four-years-ago conversation spilled over into their interview with actress Kyra Sedgwick who insisted: “...we are better off than we were four years ago.” She proceeded to downplay the struggles of average Americans and demand that they vote for Biden anyway. “Yes, I know certain things, you know, inflation, are still, like, an issue for people,” she bemoaned. “But we've got some serious issues on the line here, and should it go the other way, I feel like we're in trouble.” The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View April 1, 2024 11:03:57 a.m. Eastern (…) WHOOPI GOLDBERG: So, why is it that some people are having short memory issues? There are plenty of other reasons to feel good about where we actually are. So, why isn't that tracking? ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: Well – By the way, that triggers me to see the injecting bleach press conference. At some point, I'll tell you guys the back story of how I tried to stop that in the West Wing. But listen, Republicans are committing malpractice here. Four years ago we were literally hoarding toilet paper, like let’s just remember that! But to put on my Trump-Republican hat, I think when Republicans – GOLDBERG: Wait a minute, you. [Blows air at Farah Griffin, to blow off the figurative hat] FARAH GRIFFIN: Blow it off! Blow it off! Okay, my Republican hat. SUNNY HOSTIN: Just-Republican hat. GOLDBERG: Your Republican hat. FARAH GRIFFIN: Republicans talk fondly about the Trump era. They're talking pre-pandemic. They think, I had more money in my 401K, the economy was doing well, there were market gains. As juxtaposed to now – were the economy is objectively doing better by most macro measures, but there's this huge issue of grocery price that voters feel. So, that’s kind of what’s going on there. But I would say this: when I was watched that ad, it just brings back to mind the single greatest accomplishment of the Trump administration was Operation: Warp Speed and getting the vaccine, and he doesn't talk about it because he wants to appeal to anti-vaxxers on the right and not take credit for what helped us get out of the pandemic. (…) 11:06:12 a.m. Eastern ANA NAVARRO: There was an article the other day that said -- that asked, does America have amnesia? And so, I think the Republicans asking this question gave an opening for Democrats to remind the country where we were four years ago. And do you know what I think they should do? You said they should do more. They should allow people to download their own videos as to where they were four years ago. SARA HAINES: Yes! (…) 11:07:52 a.m. Eastern HAINES: I know that the economy, again, day-to-day, especially for people living check-to-check, you're not going to feel the recovery even though the numbers are on the way up, because even after the Great Depression, it took 11 years. People recover faster than economies do. It takes a long time. This is a global problem. It's not unique to the U.S. right now. (…) 11:24:36 a.m. Eastern KYRA SEDGWICK: I think we all need to get really busy. I think we all need to inspire each other, help to tell the story that we are better off than we were four years ago, many of us in many different ways. Yes, I know certain things, you know, inflation are still, like, an issue for people, 100 percent. But we've got some serious issues on the line here, and should it go the other way, I feel like we're in trouble. (…)

‘The Chosen’ Actor Opens Up About Getting on Knees, Giving Life to God

From broke and hungry to being the face of Jesus Christ in a major television series. In early 2024, Jonathan Roumie, the actor who played Jesus in the hit series The Chosen, appeared on ABC’s The View to promote the fourth season of the show and opened up about being at his lowest moment in life and turning his life, everything over to God… and then he got the call. Familiar with Roumie’s story, co-host Sara Haines noted that some of his gigs “weren't paying the bills” and he was thinking about “giving up on” acting, and wanted to know: “How did you decide to stay the course?”     Roumie recounted that he got his start in the movie industry as a location scout in New York City, but his first acting gig was as a voice actor in MTV’s Celebrity Deathmatch. After dipping his toe in the acting pool, he dove in and moved to Los Angeles. But then the 2008 financial crisis hit and Roumie couldn’t make ends meet: And fast forward to the housing market collapsing in 2008. I had booked a few other jobs, I started booking television, and I thought, “Okay, this is an opportunity to see if I can actually make this work.” So, I moved to L.A. and for eight years, I didn't have the safety of the job that I left in New York, it's a different unions and all sorts of complications to do the same thing in L.A., but that's not what I was going to L.A. for. So, I had to do all these other jobs, side jobs, I drove rideshare, I worked in catering, all these things I never had done before and gotten to the point where I was broke, I was out of money, I was out of food, I was out of even government assistance for food. “And the only thing I hadn't done at that point was the thing that was left to do which was to get on my knees and surrender my entire life and my career, and everything that I had up to that point over to God, because there wasn't anything I realized I could do on my own,” he said, receiving loud applause from the studio audience. Co-host Joy Behar asked him: “Were you a believer before that?” Roumie explained he was “raised with the faith from a child but it really wasn't until after that moment,” which was six years prior. Then, his personal miracle happened. “I just said, ‘Jesus, I surrender myself to you. Take care of everything.’ And that day, I received this incomprehensible financial miracle that changed my life and three months later I booked The Chosen,” he said, again getting raucous applause (including from moderator Whoopi Goldberg). God is good. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View January 30, 2024 11:48:21 a.m. Eastern (…) SARA HAINES: But those jobs weren't paying the bills so considered at some point to kind of giving up on this. How did you decide to stay the course? JONATHAN ROUMIE: Well, I worked here in New York City after college in production. I was a location scout and that was how I made a decent living. But I had starting working – MTV’s Celebrity Deathmatch was the first acting job I ever had. So, from that point I always had a curiosity about, like, “I wonder what it would look like if it went further. And fast forward to the housing market collapsing in 2008. I had booked a few other jobs, I started booking television, and I thought, “Okay, this is an opportunity to see if I can actually make this work.” So, I moved to L.A. and for eight years, I didn't have the safety of the job that I left in New York, it's a different unions and all sorts of complications to do the same thing in L.A., but that's not what I was going to L.A. for. So, I had to do all these other jobs, side jobs, I drove rideshare, I worked in catering, all these things I never had done before and gotten to the point where I was broke, I was out of money, I was out of food, I was out of even government assistance for food. And the only thing I hadn't done at that point was the thing that was left to do which was to get on my knees and surrender my entire life and my career. [Applause] And everything that I had up to that point over to God, because there wasn't anything I realized I could do on my own. BEHAR: Were you a believer before that? ROUMIE: Yeah. Yeah, I was raised with the faith from a child but it really wasn't until after that moment – It was about almost six years ago now, where I just said, “Jesus, I surrender myself to you. Take care of everything.” And that day, I received this incomprehensible financial miracle that changed my life and three months later I booked The Chosen. BEHAR: Wow. [Applause]

NBC’s Most Well-Spoken Democratic Party Policy Pusher Departs Network

The cast of NBC’s Today were in tears Friday as they bid human interest reporter (and former longtime CBS anchor) Harry Smith a fond farewell as he would be leaving the network to teach a college course and write books; essentially retiring from journalism. But we at NewsBusters know Smith as more than just the buttery smooth voice that shared tales of human experiences. Throughout his stop at NBC, he’s used that voice to promote, sell, and spin the policy proposals of the Democratic Party to millions of Americans. “I have nothing but gratitude. Every time I would come on this show I was always welcomed so generously, so generously, I've had just this unbelievable array of phenomenal experiences since coming to NBC and so I'm really full of nothing but gratitude,” Smith told the Today co-hosts. As for his plans for the future, he said he would be returning to his alma mater, Central College Iowa to teach a course on “curiosity.” But when it came to reporting on politics, Smith seemed to be exclusively curious about what was going on with Democrats. As NewsBusters reported during the run-up to the 2020 presidential election, specifically the Democratic primary, Smith helmed two complimentary and exhaustive series that were designed to present the policies of the Democratic candidates in a way that didn’t stoke contention between them, nor promote pushback or alternative Republican proposals: “My Big Idea” and “What Matters.” Smith used it as a way to make the wide Democratic field palpable to the audience and increase their chances of unseating then-President Trump. It was a concerted effort that was not repeated when a large Republican field was competing to unseat President Biden. NBC kicked off their Democratic campaigning in June of 2019 with their so-called “My Big Idea” series, giving themselves plenty of time to highlight and showcase the breadth of the Democratic field long before primary voters were cast. “And tonight, we're launching a series with our Harry Smith to let candidates tell you the idea they say separates them from the vast field of contenders. We're calling it ‘My Big Idea,’” NBC Nightly News anchor Lester Holt boasted at the time. The network dedicated a segment to every major Democratic candidate in the race, even those who didn’t stand a chance. They started with Senator Bernie Sanders (I-NH), then-California Senator Kamala Harris, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (NY), Mayor Pete Buttigieg, former Housing Secretary Julian Castro, Governor Jay Inslee (WA), Senator Cory Booker (NY), former congressman Beto O’Rourke (TX), Senator Elizabeth Warren (MA), businessman Andrew Yang, Governor Steve Bullock (MT), and Senator Amy Klobuchar (MN). Conveniently, Smith managed to cram all of those reports into a two-week time frame leading up to the first Democratic debate. And he pulled it off again with the partner series “What Matters,” where Smith sat down with the remaining candidates to discuss “what matters” to Democratic voters ahead of the second Democratic Party debate; conveniently hosted by NBC News. Beyond his work for Democrats during the 2020 election cycle, Smith was one of the liberal media folks in 2007 who praised Al Gore’s global-warming-alarmist film An Inconvenient Truth; he even tried to pin a campaign button on Gore during an interview. In 2008, Smith was so excited that then-candidate Obama got the coveted endorsement from the Kennedy family that he called him “the heir of Camelot.” Smith moped when Obama left office, cited scripture to stick it to Republicans, decried “gun rights defenders,” and bashed Americans as uncaring during the pandemic. While his NBC colleagues shed tears for his retirement, NewsBusters says good riddance.

The View's Low IQ Conspiracy Theorists: RFK Trying to 'Buy' Election

The low I.Q. members of ABC’s Cackling Coven (aka The View) were terrified on Thursday because they were apparently feeling the heat of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s independent campaign and feared it would hurt President Biden’s chances in November. They were so scared that they cooked up a fringe conspiracy theory accusing Kennedy of trying to “buy” the election by picking billionaire Nicole Shanahan to be his vice president. The View brought up the topic of Kennedy by disgustingly co-opting the death of former Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT); making it about third parties (Click “expand”): Welcome back. We do want to note that Senator Joe Lieberman passed away yesterday at 82, who founded the No Labels party to offer centralists alternatives to major party candidates. No Label does not have a candidate in the 2024 race but the third-party candidate people seem to be talking about right now is Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Reportedly, you know, people are saying, oh, the Democrats are going -- he's going to take votes from Biden and a lot of Republicans are pushing that narrative too, but I'm not sure that that's so, but I'll ask you all. What do you think of this third-party situation or possibility? After saying her peace about Lieberman, faux conservative Alyssa Farah Griffin rambled on about how “RFK has to be taken seriously” because his beliefs were “very dangerous.” “But he has money, he’s organizing, he is on the ballot in a number of key battleground states including Nevada – two battleground states,” she warned, recalling 2016, “But we know this. We know it from 2016, Jill Stein alone was enough to keep Hillary Clinton from winning in Michigan and changed the course of the election.”     Co-host Joy Behar became unglued as she ranted about how “Somebody has to ask him: why are you doing this! Why do you want to destroy the election and hand it to Trump if possible?!” She also claimed he was doing a disservice to the family name, saying: “He's a Kennedy. His forefathers are rolling over in their graves with this. His own family is telling him to get out. We already have one clown in the race. Do we need two of them?” She also suggested that Kennedy was showing the king of “delusion” that destroyed countries in the past; “that's what we're dealing with here with this.” No examples were given. Staunchly racist and anti-Semitic co-host, Sunny Hostin (the descendant of slave owners) was the first to dive into the election conspiracy waters. She clutched her pearls and suggested that Kennedy chose Shanahan, the daughter of an immigrant, for dark and sketchy motives: “Didn't he just choose a billionaire vice president? Who can help him get on the ballots in different states in battleground states.” Decrying that a candidate was trying to get on ballots, which required signatures and not cash, sounded very anti-democratic. She provided no evidence that Kennedy was buying off election officials to get on ballots. Moderator Whoopi Goldberg really bought into the conspiracy theories. She said Kennedy’s pick sent a “bad message for folks” and accuse him of trying to “buy the election.” It was a serious allegation that she provided no proof for, but she received broad approval from the rest of the cast anyway. “Keep in mind what you're hearing,” Goldberg declared, “You're not supposed to be able to buy an election.” “[Or] Buy your way onto a ballot,” Hostin added, suggesting that “the Supreme Court made sure he can.” Again, there was no explanation of how the court helped the campaign nor evidence provided of any alleged illegal activity; nor what specific activity the campaign was doing they thought ought to be illegal, for that matter. What they refused to mention was the strenuous efforts the Democratic Party was going through to make sure Kennedy’s name didn’t appear on ballots. Sounds pretty anti-democratic. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View March 28, 2024 11:15:46 a.m. Eastern WHOOPI GOLDBERG: Welcome back. We do want to note that Senator Joe Lieberman passed away yesterday at 82, who founded the No Labels party to offer centralists alternatives to major party candidates. No Label does not have a candidate in the 2024 race but the third-party candidate people seem to be talking about right now is Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Reportedly, you know, people are saying, oh, the Democrats are going -- he's going to take votes from Biden and a lot of Republicans are pushing that narrative too, but I'm not sure that that's so, but I'll ask you all. What do you think of this third-party situation or possibility? ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: I just want to say love and well wishes to the Lieberman family. He was someone I greatly admired in politics. I think it feels like the end of an era of centrism and trying to prioritize working across the aisle. I feel like we so often demonize moderation in this current era, so he will be missed. But on this third party, RFK has to be taken seriously even though I think his beliefs are out there. Some of them are very dangerous. Some of the anti-vax sentiment. But he has money, he’s organizing, he is on the ballot in a number of key battleground states including Nevada – two battleground states – But we know this. We know it from 2016, Jill Stein alone was enough to keep Hillary Clinton from winning in Michigan and changed the course of the election. (…) 11:17:59 a.m. Eastern JOY BEHAR: Somebody has to ask him: why are you doing this? Why do you want to destroy the election and hand it to Trump if possible? [Crosstalk with Sara Haines] BEHAR: He's a Kennedy. His forefathers are rolling over in their graves with this. His own family is telling him to get out. SARA HAINES: But a lot of people -- BEHAR: We already have one clown in the race. Do we need two of them? [Applause] HAINES: A lot of people including myself believe in time there is space for a third party. So, I tend to think the people that take this on aren't coming at it like, “I'm going to ruin the election for everyone.” I truly think they believe there is a lane to try to create something. I just don't think it's this election. BEHAR: I think many times delusion has destroyed a country and that's what we're dealing with here with this. The polls are too close. Even though you don't believe in them. GOLDBERG: I don't. BEHAR: I know, Whoopi. But they're close. Even though now – GOLDBERG: That's why I don't believe them. BEHAR: Biden is only slightly ahead and it’s only – what are we in, April now or March, whatever?   SUNNY HOSTIN: Yeah, we’re in April. BEHAR: Pretty soon – People are starting to focus and they’ll realize the danger that Trump poses. I believe that. HOSTIN: You know -- BEHAR: I'm not a religious person but I'm making a novena. HAINES: Oh, he's definitely going to answer. HOSTIN: And it's good because it's Holy Week. It’s Holy Week. So, it’s a very good time for that, Joy. (…) 11:20:36 a.m. Eastern HOSTIN: Didn't he just choose a billionaire vice president? FARAH GRIFFIN: Yeah. HOSTIN: Who can help him get on the ballots in different states in battleground states. GOLDBERG: Here's the thing. HOSTIN: That's pretty smart. GOLDBERG: Yeah, it's one more bad message for folks that says you can buy the election. FARAH GRIFFIN: Yeah. HOSTIN: Yeah. BEHAR: That's right. GOLDBERG: It's another -- there's so many – [Coughs] excuse me – So many messages here that – Keep in mind what you're hearing. You're not supposed to be able to buy a message -- you're not supposed to be able to buy an election. HOSTIN: Buy your way onto a ballot. GOLDBERG: You’re not supposed to be able to do that. HOSTIN: The Supreme Court made sure he can. BEHAR: That’s right. GOLDBERG: And so many things are shifting, but you right now. (…)

After Souring on Lemon, X Eyeing Real Journalist Catherine Herridge

There appeared to be a new chapter in the saga of investigative reporter Catherine Herridge, on Wednesday, regarding her next landing spot. According to The New York Post, the award-winning journalist was in talks with Elon Musk’s social media platform, X. The news came not long after Musk soured on former CNN host Don Lemon and cut off their business arraignment following a contentious and rude interview. The Post’s Alexandra Steigrad reported that Herridge “met with X CEO Linda Yaccarino at The Jefferson Hotel in Washington, DC earlier this month, according to a source with knowledge.” She also noted that the talks were very much in the early stages, but there seemed to be interest in her building out a major investigative unit: The talks have been described as “preliminary.” A potential deal could see Herridge — known for her aggressive reporting on the Hunter Biden laptop scandal — helm an investigative unit that she could help put together, according to a source close to the situation. “We are in discussions with many content creators who are interested in joining X in various ways. Catherine Herridge is a great journalist who strongly supports free speech,” X said in a statement, declining to comment further. In February, a Washington D.C.-based federal district court found her in contempt for refusing to disclose the name of a source central to a defamation suit. Last year, Musk offered to take up the cases and fund law suits against woke companies that targeted employees for what they posted on the site. Now, the case against Herridge did involve her past reporting with Fox News, and the network was also covering her legal fees in the case. But perhaps X also saw an opportunity with Herridge to double down on their support for the First Amendment and support real journalism. An anonymous source told The Post “that the Herridge had run into ‘internal roadblocks’ on her reporting of Biden’s laptop from top brass at CBS.” Which could have played a role in her ultimately being fired during a wave of mass playoffs at the third-place broadcast network that had been described as a “bloodbath.” But, as The Post noted: “joining X could give the journalist freedom to pursue a variety of stories” she otherwise couldn’t if she remained at CBS or a major news outlet.

The View Gets TRIGGERED By a Guest Who Argues Against Racism

ABC’s The View has been a major source of racial hatred and division in America thanks to the likes of staunchly racist and anti-Semitic co-host, Sunny Hostin (the descendant of slave owners) and moderator Whoopi Goldberg. So, it was a surprise when they invited podcaster and author Coleman Hughes to promote his book about removing race as a factor in government policy-making, on Wednesday's show. His reasonable position led Hostin to call him a “charlatan” and a “conservative” as a smear, and Goldberg to attack his age. Since he was there to promote his book The End of Race Politics: Arguments for a Colorblind America, Goldberg asked him to set the stage by explaining what he meant by “colorblind.” “My argument is that we should try our very best to treat people without regard to race both in our personal lives and public policy…” he said. He also denounced the so-called “anti-racism” movement. “The reason I wrote this book is that in the past ten years, it has become very popular to in the name of anti-racism, teach a kind of philosophy to our children and in general that says your race is everything. Right? I think that is the wrong way to fight racism and that's why I wrote this book at this time,” he said. Not dividing people along racial lines didn’t sit well with Goldberg, who proceeded to suggest that Hughes was too young and just didn’t understand history (Click “expand”): GOLDBERG: Can I just point out that there is a reason for that? You know, when I went to school, getting any information about anyone's race was not taught in history. There was no black history. None of those things were taught and here in America -- 100 years ago when I was a young woman -- [Laughter] -- That's how people saw you, that’s how they judged you. So, I think -- I don't want to say it's your youth but I think you have a point but I think you have to also take into consideration what people have lived through in order to understand why there has been such a pointing of very specific racial things. Like, women couldn't get into colleges; if you are a black person, there are a lot of colleges wouldn't accept you. Trying to equal the playing. I think that's what a lot of folks have been trying to do. I'm sorry, I didn't mean to cut you off. HUGHES: I think that's your experience and that's valid. As a counterpoint when I was in fifth grade we all watched Roots together in public school. GOLDBERG: Yeah. HUGHES: So, these are different experiences. I think it's also different generations, it’s different parts of the country. Right? We have very different cultures all living together in one country, so I'm not going to deny that.     Hughes said that “a colorblind society” was “an ideal. It's a north star and the point is not that we'll ever get there, we’re not going to touch it but we have to know when we're going forward and backwards.” He declared that wokeism was a force bringing us backward. He went on to denounce the use of “black and Hispanic identity as a proxy for disadvantage” and said “socioeconomics is a better proxy for disadvantage,” because “you actually get a better picture of who needs help by looking at socioeconomics and income. That picks out people in a more accurate way.” He noted that the method would also help poor white folks. The idea that people were more than just their skin color triggered Hostin, who called his premise “fundamentally flawed.” She and Hughes proceeded to spare over the legacy of civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr., each throwing out competing quotes. Hostin argued that she was a better authority on MLK because she was friends with his daughter (Click “expand”): HOSTIN: This is not my question, but when you say that socioeconomics picks out people in a better way than race, when you do look at the socioeconomics, you see the huge disparity between white households and black households. You see the huge disparity between white households and Hispanic households. So, your argument – and I've read your book twice because I wanted to give it a chance – your argument that race has no place in that equation is really fundamentally flawed in my opinion. [Applause] HUGHES: Well, two separate questions. One is whether each racial group is socioeconomically the same. I agree with you, they're not. HOSTIN: Yeah, they're not and the stats show that. HUGHES: Of course, I agree with that fully. The question is: how do you address that in a way that actually targets poverty the best? HOSTIN: Great. HUGHES: And what Martin Luther King wrote in his book Why We Can't Wait is he called it, we need a bill of rights for the disadvantaged. And he said, yes, we should address racial equality, yes, we should address the legacy of slavery, but the way to do that is on the basis of class. And that will disproportionately target blacks and Hispanics because they're disproportionately poor, but it will be doing so in a way that also helps the white poor in a way that addresses poverty as the thing to be addressed. HOSTIN: That part is true, but as you are a student of Dr. King, I'm not only a student of Dr. King, I know his daughter Bernice. Right? So, I'm going to get to my question. JOY BEHAR: Go ahead. Go right ahead. HOSTIN: I think the premise is fundamentally flawed. You claim that color-blindness was the goal of the civil rights movement based upon Dr. King's "I have a dream" speech. You know, content of character versus color of skin. Bernice, Dr. King's daughter points out that four years after giving that speech actually, Dr. King also said this, "A society that has done something special against the Negro for hundreds of years must now do something special for negroes." He also said in 1968, it was about less than a week before he was assassinated, "This country never stops to realize that they owe a people kept in slavery for 244 years." So, rather than class, he did write about that earlier on. Right before his death, he made the argument for racial equality and racial reparations, and so your argument for color-blindness, I think, is something that the right has co-opted. Backed into a corner, Hostin resorted to trying to smear Hughes as a “conservative” and a “charlatan,” citing unnamed “critics” (Click “expand”): HOSTIN: And so many in the black community – if I'm being honest with you, because I want to be, believe that you are being used as a pawn by the right and that you're a charlatan of sorts. HUGHES: Who am I being accused by? ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: He's not a Republican. HOSTIN: So, how do you – FARAH GRIFFIN: He’s never voted for a Republican. HOSTIN: You said you're a conservative. HUGHES: No. No. FARAH GRIFFIN: No. HOSTIN: No, you did. You actually said that in a podcast that you were two weeks ago. HUGHES: I said I was a conservative? FARAH GRIFFIN: He’s not. HOSTIN: Yes, you did. Informing Hostin that he’s only ever voted for Democrats as a left-leaning independent (and would only vote for a “non-Trump Republican if they were compelling” enough), Hughes said there was “no evidence” that he’s been “co-opted” and what she was doing was “an ad hominem tactic people use to not address, really, the important conversations we're having here.” Following a commercial break, co-host Joy Behar made it known that she couldn’t wrap her mind around the fact that the “anti-racism movement” mirrored white supremacy. Hughes explained that people like Robin DiAngelo and Ibram X. Kennedi “view your race as an extremely significant part of who you are,” just like white supremacists. “Neo-racists like Robin DiAngelo, they say that to be white is to be ignorant, for example. Well, this is a racial stereotype and I want to call a spade a spade and say this is not the style of anti-racism we have to be teaching our kids. We should be teaching them that your race is not a significant feature of who you are, who you are is your character, your value, and your skin color doesn't say anything about that,” he declared, getting applause from the audience. Hostin tried to argue that he was “misrepresenting what Robin DiAngelo’s position is,” but he shot back with: “It's in her book.” The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View March 27, 2024 11:37:45 a.m. Eastern WHOOPI GOLDBERG: Welcome back. Political analyst and author Coleman Hughes makes a case for changing the national conversation on racism in his new book, The End of Race Politics: Arguments for a Colorblind America. Please welcome Coleman Hughes. [Applause] So, I think the first question that I should ask you to do is explain to folks what you mean by this, “arguments for a color-blind America.” What do you mean when you say that? COLEMAN HUGHES: So, a lot of people equate color-blindness to “I don't see race” or pretending not to see race. I think that's a big mistake. We all see race, right? And we're all capable of being racially biased, so we should all be self-aware to that possibility. My argument is not for that. My argument is that we should try our very best to treat people without regard to race both in our personal lives and public policy and the reason I wrote this book – Thank you. [Applause] The reason I wrote this book is that in the past ten years, it has become very popular to in the name of anti-racism, teach a kind of philosophy to our children and in general that says your race is everything. Right? I think that is the wrong way to fight racism and that's why I wrote this book at this time. GOLDBERG: Can I – I’m sorry, baby [to Sara Haines]. Can I just point out that there is a reason for that? You know, when I went to school, getting any information about anyone's race was not taught in history. There was no black history. None of those things were taught and here in America -- 100 years ago when I was a young woman -- [Laughter] -- That's how people saw you, that’s how they judged you. So, I think -- I don't want to say it's your youth but I think you have a point but I think you have to also take into consideration what people have lived through in order to understand why there has been such a pointing of very specific racial things. Like, women couldn't get into colleges; if you are a black person, there are a lot of colleges wouldn't accept you. Trying to equal the playing. I think that's what a lot of folks have been trying to do. I'm sorry, I didn't mean to cut you off. HUGHES: I think that's your experience and that's valid. As a counterpoint when I was in fifth grade we all watched Roots together in public school. GOLDBERG: Yeah. HUGHES: So, these are different experiences. I think it's also different generations, it’s different parts of the country. Right? We have very different cultures all living together in one country, so I'm not going to deny that. But I view this notion of a colorblind society similar to the idea of a peaceful society. Which is to say, it's an ideal. It's a north star and the point is not that we'll ever get there, we’re not going to touch it but we have to know when we're going forward and backwards. And we're going backwards when we're doing woke kindergarten in San Francisco, you know, with -- you didn't hear this about story? GOLDBERG: No, but, wait. SARA HAINES: Want to get to the book. Because actually, you believe that public policies that address socioeconomic differences would be better benefiting disadvantaged groups and that race-based policies often hurt the very people they're trying to help. What are some examples of policies that would be better at reducing racial disparities? HUGHES: So, my overall argument is that class, socioeconomics is a better proxy for disadvantage. We all want to help the disadvantaged, and the question is how do we identify them. Right? The default right now in a lot of areas of policy is to use, you know, black and Hispanic identity as a proxy for disadvantage. And my argument is that you actually get a better picture of who needs help by looking at socioeconomics and income. That picks out people in a more accurate way. [Applause] Right? SUNNY HOSTIN: This is not my question, but when you say that socioeconomics picks out people in a better way than race, when you do look at the socioeconomics, you see the huge disparity between white households and black households. You see the huge disparity between white households and Hispanic households. So, your argument – and I've read your book twice because I wanted to give it a chance – your argument that race has no place in that equation is really fundamentally flawed in my opinion. [Applause] HUGHES: Well, two separate questions. One is whether each racial group is socioeconomically the same. I agree with you, they're not. HOSTIN: Yeah, they're not and the stats show that. HUGHES: Of course, I agree with that fully. The question is: how do you address that in a way that actually targets poverty the best? HOSTIN: Great. HUGHES: And what Martin Luther King wrote in his book Why We Can't Wait is he called it, we need a bill of rights for the disadvantaged. And he said, yes, we should address racial equality, yes, we should address the legacy of slavery, but the way to do that is on the basis of class. And that will disproportionately target blacks and Hispanics because they're disproportionately poor, but it will be doing so in a way that also helps the white poor in a way that addresses poverty as the thing to be addressed. HOSTIN: That part is true, but as you are a student of Dr. King, I'm not only a student of Dr. King, I know his daughter Bernice. Right? So, I'm going to get to my question. JOY BEHAR: Go ahead. Go right ahead. HOSTIN: I think the premise is fundamentally flawed. You claim that color-blindness was the goal of the civil rights movement based upon Dr. King's "I have a dream" speech. You know, content of character versus color of skin. Bernice, Dr. King's daughter points out that four years after giving that speech actually, Dr. King also said this, "A society that has done something special against the Negro for hundreds of years must now do something special for negroes." He also said in 1968, it was about less than a week before he was assassinated, "This country never stops to realize that they owe a people kept in slavery for 244 years." So, rather than class, he did write about that earlier on. Right before his death, he made the argument for racial equality and racial reparations, and so your argument for color-blindness, I think, is something that the right has co-opted. And so many in the black community – if I'm being honest with you, because I want to be, believe that you are being used as a pawn by the right and that you're a charlatan of sorts. HUGEHS: Who am I being accused by? ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: He's not a Republican. HOSTIN: So, how do you – FARAH GRIFFIN: He’s never voted for a Republican. HOSTIN: You said you're a conservative. HUGHES: No. No. FARAH GRIFFIN: No. HOSTIN: No, you did. You actually said that in a podcast that you were two weeks ago. HUGHES: I said I was a conservative? FARAH GRIFFIN: He’s not. HOSTIN: Yes, you did. But my question to you is, how do you respond to those critics -- [Crosstalk saying to let him speak] HUGHES: I think it’s very important. The quote that you just pointed out about doing something special for the Negro, that's from the book Why We Can't Wait that I just mentioned. A couple paragraphs later he lays out exactly what that something special was and it was the bill of rights for the disadvantaged, a broad class-based policy. HOSTIN: But he also says you must include race. HUGHES:  No, he says -- HOSTIN: Yes, he does. HUGHES: Well, everyone should go read the buy Why We Can't Wait. Let's not get sidetracked by that. I don't think I've been co-opted by anyone. I've only voted twice, both for a Democrats. Although, I'm an independent. I would vote for a Republican, probably a non-trump Republican if they were compelling. I don't think there's any evidence I’ve been co-opted by anyone and I think that's an ad hominem tactic people use to not address, really, the important conversations we're having here. And I think it's better and it would be better for everyone if we stuck to the topics rather than make it about me. With no evidence of that I’ve been co-opted. HOSTIN: I want to give you the opportunity to respond to the -- HUGHES: I appreciate it. HOSTIN: The criticism. HUGHES: There's no evidence that I've been co-opted by anyone. I have an independent podcast. I work for CNN as an analyst. I write for the Free Press. I'm independent in all of these endeavors and no one is paying me to say what I'm saying. I'm saying it because I feel it. HOSTIN: Do you also believe – GOLDBERG: Hold on, we got to go to break. (…) 11:51:28 a.m. Eastern JOY BEHAR: I have a question. Because you write the anti-racism movement, there are a couple of people -- I don't even know who they are, maybe you know. HOSTIN: Robin DiAngelo. HUGHES: Robin DiAngelo, Ibram X. Kennedi, for instance. BEHAR: Okay. Well, you say that that is just another form of racism and you even say there’s a lot in common with white supremacy. How can you compare those two things? You’re talking about anti-racism, you are comparing it to white supremacy. HUGHES: Because they both view your race as an extremely significant part of who you are. So, white supremacists they obviously say – we all know what they say, okay. Neo-racists like Robin DiAngelo, they say that to be white is to be ignorant, for example. Well, this is a racial stereotype and I want to call a spade a spade and say this is not the style of anti-racism we have to be teaching our kids. We should be teaching them that your race is not a significant feature of who you are, who you are is your character, your value, and your skin color doesn't say anything about that. [Applause] HOSTIN: That's – that’s actually misrepresenting what Robin DiAngelo’s position is. HUGHES: It's in her book. [Crosstalk] GOLDBEGR: So, here we go. Thank you. Coleman Hughes, for coming. Because this is a show of lots of different opinions and we are multigenerational and we all got an opinion. So, The End of Pace Politics: Arguments for a Colorblind America is out now. And we’re giving it to you all, so you can read it and judge for yourself how you feel about what he's saying.

‘Pretentious Bull****’: NewsNation Takes on NBC Journos Attacking New GOP Hire

Hours before news broke that NBC News may be firing their newly hired Republican political analyst, former RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel, NewsNation stuck it to their cable news rival. During Monday night’s Cuomo, correspondent at-large Geraldo Rivera called out their “pretentious bullshit,” and host Chris Cuomo proclaimed that “the hypocrisy reeks” at the network. Cuomo led into the segment by calling out his former morning show rivals (when he co-hosted CNN’s New Day) for their rank “hypocrisy” in calling for McDaniel’s ouster when they benefitted from being pals with Donald Trump before he got elected: Look, I have no beef. But it was okay for you, Mika [Brzezinski] and Joe [Scarborough], to have Trump on all the time to talk to him about what questions to ask, right? When it was working for you when he was running, right? When you guys are all pals, that was ok, right? You have any problem with that, right? Just because you went bad on him when it became convenient because you work at a lefty outlet. This is okay now you can be high-minded about it, right? The hypocrisy reeks! When asked for his take, the first words out of Rivera’s mouth were “Screw them!” “I mean, the whole idea is that they were hiring her to be the ultimate insider. And here she gets washed or she gets drowned by this tsunami of pretensions bullshit,” he added. “Really, all of these people that have a stick up there behind, how dare they.” Rivera took on McDaniel’s most prominent naysayers: Brzezinski and Chuck Todd: “When did she become management? When did she become, you know, the arbiter of who got hired and who doesn't get hired? And Chuck Todd, I don't remember his years, his nine years at Meet The Press as being exactly triumphant.”     Continuing to focus on the Morning Joe crew, Cuomo pointed out “the bias at play” in how their friends in the liberal media didn’t have an issue with their buddy-buddy relationship with Trump during the 2016 election cycle: I was against them in the morning at CNN and I still beat them twice even with them having Trump on all the time. And you remember the tape that came out, Geraldo, of them in break asking Trump about what questions to ask next and how they were going to do their next segment of the town hall. And nobody got upset about it. It was there and gone because all the reporters want to be on their show iin the morning. But now they have standards about what's right and what's wrong. It's all advantage. It's all hypocrisy. Following a recounting from Rivera about a similar protest against him at ABC (you can check that out in the transcript below), he defended McDaniel as “a perfect hire 8 months before the election. Who knows more about the mechanics of the Republican Party than she does?” Cuomo agreed: “Alright, she's coming on. I guarantee you she would have exposed things, she would explain things in a way that would be satisfying to that audience. You make such a huge mistake when you limit who you talk to to be the people who already agree with you.” As they were nearing the end of the segment, Cuomo told the NBCers that they needed to “get out of the silos,” but warned that “their talent has come out and shown you what they're about. They are not as tolerant on voices.” “But you guys did the wrong thing with Trump when it and now you've gotten religion on it,” he scolded Scarborough and Brzezinski. “But remember what you did, you're lucky to get thrown out on your ass because of it. Now, you not affording the same sympathies going forward. I just think it's a hypocrisy thing.” Seeming almost prophetic in hindsight, Rivera’s final advice for McDaniel was to wait it out and maybe have a nice payday in court: “My thought is that I hope she tells them all to screw it, she's sticking around, forces them to fire her and then sues them for millions because that they have humiliated her in a very, very unjust way.” Perhaps NewsNation saw the writing on the wall and were making an on-air play to appeal to McDaniel if/when NBC gave her the boot. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: NewsNation’s Cuomo March 25, 2024 8:39:29 p.m. Eastern (…) CHRIS CUOMO: NBC hires her. I'm sure other people we're trying to get her. But now everybody's mad. Now, this happens in the media. Somebody hire somebody that other people would have hired as well, but they attacked the place that hired her. But this is coming in-house; big shots inside NBC like Morning Joe co-host Mika Brzezinski. She said this. [Cuts to video] MIKA BRZEZINSKI: And we hope NBC will reconsider its decision. It goes without saying that she will not be a guest on Morning Joe in her capacity as a paid contributor. [Cuts back to live] CUOMO: Look, I have no beef. But it was okay for you, Mika and Joe, to have Trump on all the time to talk to him about what questions to ask, right? When it was working for you when he was running, right? When you guys are all pals, that was ok, right? You have any problem with that, right? Just because you went bad on him when it became convenient because you work at a lefty outlet. This is okay now you can be high-minded about it, right? The hypocrisy reeks!   NewsNation correspondent at-large Geraldo Rivera. Look, I get making the decision not to hire McDaniel, but the idea that NBC News, Chuck Todd, or Mika Brzezinski, or Joe Scarborough are offended. What do you make of it? GERALDO RIVER: Screw them! I mean, I like everyone you just named. I don't know Chuck Todd, but Mike and Joe and I heard Nicolle Wallace said something bad against the Ronna McDaniel. I mean, the whole idea is that they were hiring her to be the ultimate insider. And here she gets washed or she gets drowned by this tsunami of pretensions bullshit. Really, all of these people that have a stick up there behind, how dare they. And for Mika to say NBC shouldn't hire them. When did she become management? When did she become you know, the - the - the - the arbiter of who got hired and who doesn't get hired. And Chuck Todd, I don't remember his years, his nine years at Meet The Press as being exactly triumphant. You know, she is the ultimate insider and to say that they don't want to hire her now because of election denialism. Well, then you don't want half the country to watch your network because half country is Republican more or less. And they – they believe a lot of them or at least they've convinced themselves about election being a, you know, fraudulent or whatever it is. Now, I think that she's wrong. I think that the Republican Party is going off the cliff. But the fact is they hired her to be who she is, who she was and for them now, these other talent, you know, some of past their prime to – to go after her and then they won't have her. I think that's – that's baloney. CUOMO: I mean, look, I like it on one level. Okay? One is Ronna McDaniel and all the Trumpers beyond the pale from what they're used to see? Yes, they advanced things that go beyond questions of fact, unarguable questions? However, now you see the bias at play, especially when it comes to Mika and Joe. I was against them in the morning at CNN and I still beat them twice even with them having Trump on all the time. And you remember the tape that came out, Geraldo, of them in break asking Trump about what questions to ask next and how they were going to do their next segment of the town hall. And nobody got upset about it. It was there and gone because all the reporters want to be on their show iin the morning. But now they have standards about what's right and what's wrong. It's all advantage. It's all hypocrisy. RIVERA: It's also pretension and – and a bogus I’m holier than thou. I remember way in 1977. Go way back to very brief story. I was on Good Morning America and I had a show called Good Night America. Roone Arledge, the legendary boss of ABC got the big gig. He says to me, “I want you on the evening news.” It was the Son of Sam. Son of Sam was happening. “No one knows New York better than you Geraldo. I want you on it.” Ted Koppel and a bunch of guys from the Washington bureau of ABC. Ted Kopple tells this story Arledge’s eulogy. Now they want to Roone Arledge and said, “You can’t hire Geraldo, he's not one of us. He’s not professional. He’s done all this crazy stuff. And we're going to resign.” Roone Arledge said, “Okay. Put your resignation on the desk.” And I went on and I stayed on and screw them. And since then I all of these, you know, that holier than thou, lecturey, pompous, I'm going to be Walter Cronkite – You know, so many anchors have said to me or said to others, “He's a he's not fit for—“ And 54 years later, I'm still I'm still here, after I started because the American people have made a decision about me. Television’s a lie detector. You look right through it. She’s a perfect hire 8 months before the election. Who knows more about the mechanics of the Republican Party than she does? You know, and if you're going to find Republicans who except the 2020 results as legit, you know, good luck to you and your search. CUOMO: Look, I just think that you've got to get out of the silos. At least MSNBC. Their talent has come out and shown you what they're about. They are not as tolerant on voices. Now, you can say, “No, these people lie.” A lot of people lie. Alright, she's coming on. I guarantee you she would have exposed things, she would explain things in a way that would be satisfying to that audience. You make such a huge mistake when you limit who you talk to to be the people who already agree with you. And they're making that mistake. But at least they let you know. And I know they're going to come back at me. It's not done with animus. I wish them well. I think Mika Brzezinski cares about what she does. I think that's basically true about Joe Scarborough too. But you guys did the wrong thing with Trump when it and now you've gotten religion on it. But remember what you did, you're lucky to get thrown out on your ass because of it. Now, you not affording the same sympathies going forward. I just think it's a hypocrisy thing. I got to jump. Do you have a last button? RIVERA: My thought is that I hope she tells them all to screw it, she's sticking around, forces them to fire her and then sues them for millions because that they have humiliated her in a very, very unjust way. CUOMO: And also from management. I never got to decide who comes on my show and who doesn't. That was always the bosses. RIVERA: Exactly. Exactly. CUOMO: You know, and it is now too, by the way. And look, I'm at different level of the game, but if they say they want somebody on, they say they want me to go somewhere. I go. That's what being an employee is all about. (…)

INSANE Kathy Griffin Defends Pic Holding Trump’s Bloody Severed Head

Revisionist history and hypocrisy were once again the theme of ABC’s The View, on Tuesday. So-called “comedian” Kathy Griffin was one of the special guests, there to pitch her new “comedy” tour, and she defended her infamous picture of her holding up an effigy of then-President Trump’s bloody severed head. She got raucous support from the Cackling Coven for how she was not “afraid to take on powerful men” in that way. “This is your first tour in six years,” moderator Whoopi Goldberg falsely declared. “Six years I was out of work because of that [audio cuts out and mouth blurred]! There, I said what it was!” Griffin cursed and lied. In reality, the supposed harm to her career was either all in her broken head or part of the false narrative she was using to get sympathy and lefties to turn out to her shows. As NewsBusters reported by in August 2019, People magazine did a puff piece on Griffin, boasting about how she was “still standing” after the blowup. They noted Griffin had booked shows in 15 countries “from Iceland to Australia” including shows in Carnegie Hall and Radio City. Her IMDB page also shows she was credited with works throughout Trump’s presidency and Biden’s. There’s the obvious dropoff during the pandemic when production of many shows was put on hold and live shows really weren’t happening.     She went on to defend her so-called ‘joke’ about killing Trump: “All about a picture! A picture I took making fun of the president, which you're supposed to do as a comic!” “They made you pay,” co-host Joy Behar lamented. Griffin has never adequately explained what the punchline of the picture was and she didn’t seem to like it when she was at the butt of that joke. She vented to Behar about the “hate” she received from Trump supporters who protested one of her shows with an effigy of her head: BEHAR: But you still have to deal and contend with these Trump supporters. GRIFFIN: They're crazed over me! So, there was an actual parade Sunday night at my show in Huntington, New York, and they had all these Trumpers organize an anti-Kathy griffin parade. It was kind of funny because they did have a bobbing redhead of me, an effigy and they had -- they were shouting I'm a traitor and all this other stuff. But the audience came inside so it was like hate on the outside and inclusive love and laughs on the inside and it was sold out! “Now, you have never been afraid to take on powerful men and billionaire Elon Musk is just no exception. Thank you very much!” staunchly racist and anti-Semitic co-host, Sunny Hostin (the descendant of slave owners) commended Griffin. Enabling Griffin's psychosis, Hostin begged her to recount how her insanity led her to impersonate Elon Musk on X and abuse her "dead mother's account" to troll him (Click “expand”): GRIFFIN: I love starting beefs with very powerful men. That's why I'm out of work but I can't help it. I can't help confronting them. I change my name right before the midterm elections from Kathy Griffin to Elon Musk – SARA HAINES: Oh, I remember this. GRIFFIN: -- and I started tweeting, “It's me, Elon. I've talked to the mothers of all my children and now I'm firmly pro-choice.” [Laughter] And he got so mad and I kept tweeting as him going #BidenHarris, #VoteBlueNoMatterWho. So, he took away my account and then I started -- this is so twisted! I started trolling him from my dead mother's account. HAINES: [Laughter] GRIFFIN: And I said, this is the ghost of Maggie Griffin. Vote blue. Be a Democrat. Be proud. And he was livid so his fanboys came after me and they all said, you're old and irrelevant and you're a man and you're ugly, the usual. HOSTIN: [Laughter] GRIFFIN: So, then I got a call from Jimmy Kimmel and he said I love that you're giving it to him. So, they run a sketch where I could play Elon and went on the Kimmel show the next night and played Elon, stuck it to him again! She suggested that Musk took personal offense and that’s why she was banned, but impersonating people without a "parody" notation somewhere on the account was against X’s terms of service. Other Musk parody accounts were allowed to stay on the platform because they followed the rules. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View March 26, 2024 11:32:44 a.m. Eastern (…) WHOOPI GOLDBERG: This is your first tour in six years. KATHY GRIFFIN: Six years I was out of work because of that [audio cuts out and mouth blurred]! There, I said what it was! All about a picture! A picture I took making fun of the president, which you're supposed to do as a comic! [Applause] JOY BEHAR: They made you pay. [Applause] GOLDBERG: So you’re feeling pretty good about being back. GRIFFIN: Oh, I love it! (…) 11:36:00 a.m. Eastern BEHAR: But you still have to deal and contend with these Trump supporters. GRIFFIN: They're crazed over me! So, there was an actual parade Sunday night at my show in Huntington, New York, and they had all these Trumpers organize an anti-Kathy griffin parade. It was kind of funny because they did have a bobbing redhead of me, an effigy and they had -- they were shouting I'm a traitor and all this other stuff. But the audience came inside so it was like hate on the outside and inclusive love and laughs on the inside and it was sold out! [Applause] (…) 11:37:47 a.m. Eastern SUNNY HOSTIN: Now, you have never been afraid to take on powerful men and billionaire Elon Musk is just no exception. Thank you very much! GRIFFIN: Yeah. HOSTIN: Can you tell us about a Twitter war? I guess it's an X war that -- apparently you started with him. GRIFFIN: Oh, yeah, I can't stand that [audio cuts out and mouth blurred]. [Laughter] But, come on. BEHAR: Every time you curse an angel does not get its wings and Brian has a nervous breakdown. GRIFFIN:  Hi, Brian. Sorry. It’s me again! BEHAR: Try to keep it down. GRIFFIN: 25 years I've been coming here swearing. Sorry, friend! I love starting beefs with very powerful men. That's why I'm out of work but I can't help it. I can't help confronting them. I change my name right before the midterm elections from Kathy Griffin to Elon Musk – SARA HAINES: Oh, I remember this. GRIFFIN: -- and I started tweeting, “It's me, Elon. I've talked to the mothers of all my children and now I'm firmly pro-choice.” [Laughter] And he got so mad and I kept tweeting as him going #BidenHarris, #VoteBlueNoMatterWho. So, he took away my account and then I started -- this is so twisted! I started trolling him from my dead mother's account. HAINES: [Laughter] GRIFFIN: And I said, this is the ghost of Maggie Griffin. Vote blue. Be a Democrat. Be proud. And he was livid so his fanboys came after me and they all said, you're old and irrelevant and you're a man and you're ugly, the usual. HOSTIN: [Laughter] GRIFFIN: So, then I got a call from Jimmy Kimmel and he said I love that you're giving it to him. So, they run a sketch where I could play Elon and went on the Kimmel show the next night and played Elon, stuck it to him again! (…)

MSNBC Cuts Away from Trump Decrying Trial as 'Election Interference'

Former President Trump was in a New York City courtroom to deal with the hush money case against him, on Monday, but when he stepped out of the courthouse to speak to the press, he threw MSNBC into a tailspin. The liberal network frantically cut off his audio and threw it back to 12:00 p.m. host Andrea Mitchell because he dared to say the case was “election interference.” Before Trump appeared outside the building, Mitchell was speaking with correspondent Vaughn Hillyard, who was outside the courthouse. Both were eager to hear what Trump had to say. “I can see him now!” Mitchell excitedly announced. HILLYARD: We are seeing him walk out here. He’s then going to make remarks. I’ll just step aside here, Andrea. MITCHELL: Yeah, Vaughn, let's listen. “Now, they're fighting over days because they want to try to do it during the election. This is election interference, that’s all it is. It is election interference. And it's a disgrace,” Trump said before MSNBC could cut the feed. “But this is a pure case of voter intimidation and election interference. And it shouldn't be allowed to happen. This case could have been brought by the D.A., but they didn’t want – [Audio cuts out]”     The disruption was so abrupt that Mitchell seemed caught off guard and struggled to find the word to dismiss Trump’s assertions. “And we’re going to – The former President is repeating what he has said often, that this is a case of election interference, which is arguably not the fact,” she proclaimed. Mitchell was still fumbling around when she handed it off to NPR national political correspondent Mara Liasson to decry Trump for “spinning a lot of this”: MITCHELL: Mara Liasson, let’s – let’s – you jump in here, as well. They're talking about the way that he has been successfully spinning a lot of this. LIASSON: Spinning and delaying. So, there's tactics and there’s strategy. The tactic is to delay as long as possible, hopefully past the election. The strategy is to destroy American's faith in the justice system, so that whatever the result of these trials, Donald Trump can dismiss them or say that they're phony just like he tried to do with the election. And that's why you hear him saying election interference, voter intimidation. You know, he is casting this as if the justice system itself is on trial, not him. Mitchell went on to blame Trump for New York District Attorney Alvin Bragg waiting until 2023 to bring the case against Trump, knowing that it could conflict/complicate an election year: And he said that this is a case that could have been brought three and a half years ago, and they're now fighting over days. This is election interference. Of course, a lot of the delay in bringing the case, at least under, you know, prosecutor Bragg, not the previous investigation, had to do with the delays caused by all of the defense motions. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell Reports March 25, 2024 12:17:43 p.m. Eastern (…) VAUGHN HILLYARD: Donald Trump, we expect him to head -- ANDREA MITCHELL: I can see him now! HILLYARD: -- down the road to his skyscraper. We are seeing him walk out here. He’s then going to make remarks. I’ll just step aside here, Andrea. MITCHELL: Yeah, Vaughn, let's listen. DONALD TRUMP: Now, they're fighting over days because they want to try to do it during the election. This is election interference, that’s all it is. It is election interference. And it's a disgrace. Well, obviously, we appeal it. But this is a pure case of voter intimidation and election interference. And it shouldn't be allowed to happen. This case could have been brought by the D.A., but they didn’t want – [Audio cuts out] MITCHELL: And we’re going to – The former President is repeating what he has said often, that this is a case of election interference, which is arguably not the fact. Mara Liasson, let’s – let’s – you jump in here, as well. They're talking about the way that he has been successfully spinning a lot of this. MARA LIASSON: Spinning and delaying. So, there's tactics and there’s strategy. The tactic is to delay as long as possible, hopefully past the election. The strategy is to destroy American's faith in the justice system, so that whatever the result of these trials, Donald Trump can dismiss them or say that they're phony just like he tried to do with the election. And that's why you hear him saying election interference, voter intimidation. You know, he is casting this as if the justice system itself is on trial, not him. (…) 12:21:09 p.m. Eastern MITCHELL: Now, he's also said, while we were talking just now, that this is a case of clear election interference and voter intimidation, that this decision today is something he will appeal. And he said that this is a case that could have been brought three and a half years ago, and they're now fighting over days. This is election interference. Of course, a lot of the delay in bringing the case, at least under, you know, prosecutor Bragg, not the previous investigation, had to do with the delays caused by all of the defense motions. (…)

The View Hypocrites RAGE at NBC Hiring Former RNC Chairwoman McDaniel

The revolving door between American politics and the media only becomes an issue when the wannabe gatekeepers don’t like who comes through. The mean girls of ABC’s The View had their knives out for former Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel on Monday after she was hired by NBC News to be a commentator. And their infamous hypocrisy was on full display as they decried her for doing what many of their friends did to get into the business, including some of the cast members themselves. Following a clip of NBC chief political analyst Chuck Todd melting down on Meet the Press over the weekend, faux conservative Ana Navarro lacked self-awareness when she decried McDaniel as “a shapeshifter” who “says and does what's convenient for her to say and do when it's convenient.” Navarro commended Todd for being “very right” for “calling into question on the air” the decision of NBC to hire McDaniel. She then proved just how part of the swamp she was by bragging about being personal friends with the boss of NBCUniversal News Group and scolding him: The head of NBC News is a good friend of mine from Miami, Cesar Conde. I've known him for over 20 years. I think this was a mistake because you're allowing somebody who was part of the machine – right? -- a figurehead, a household name, reinvent herself. And I do think that there's credibility issues, and it's up to the hosts, the journalists, the staff, the viewers to make it known if they are unhappy about it. Her comment about McDaniel being a “household name” was also evidence of just how far removed Navarro was from average Americans, who didn’t make their money spewing hate about political figures on TV. And speaking of former Trump supporters who were allowed to “reinvent herself” (as Navarro whined), useless Republican Alyssa Farah Griffin refused to mention criticism of NBC’s ethically dubious hire of former Biden Press Secretary Jen Psaki, who was fielding questions from NBC reporters when it was publically know she was destined to get a show on the network. Psaki was even taking questions from then-White House correspondent Kristen Welker, who Farah Griffin praised as “an incredible journalist.”     And as if there weren’t already enough Never Trump Republicans at NBC and MSNBC, Farah Griffin suggested that they hire more people like her: I feel very strongly, obviously, that there needs to be Republican representation in media. We represent 50 percent of the country, but there are incredible Republicans who never dabbled in this dangerous lie that Joe Biden didn't legitimately win the election who would be far better served for NBC, could offer the same expertise, but with more credibility. I think if people like Chris Christie, Chris Krebs, Sarah Matthews, Mick Mulvaney, Will Hurd. “There were other sketchy things that happened, and [McDaniel] was a direct part of it. You know, I think, when journalism is shrinking, especially on linear television, to pay a woman like that $300,000 is obscene,” kvetched staunchly racist and anti-Semitic co-host, Sunny Hostin (the descendant of slave owners). Psaki had her own sketchy history that Hostin didn’t want to mention. When she was the spokeswoman for the Obama State Department, video was deleted of her getting called out and admitting to misleading the press (and thus the American people) about President Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran. Co-host Sara Haines agreed that the media did “need to represent more voices” but added that “you cannot have election deniers being given these types of roles in major network news.” Meanwhile, The View welcomed and defended election deniers like White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre who tried to cast doubt on the fact former President Trump won the 2016 election. Moderator Whoopi Goldberg defended Jean-Pierre, by proclaiming she was “doing her part.” In, fact, Hostin admitted that she herself pushed election denialism in the same episode. Goldberg defended her too: “But that's how you felt! You had every right to say it!” Of course, this was all said on ABC News. The same network that took President Clinton’s former hatchetman George Stephanopoulos and turned him into their chief news anchor. And around and around the revolving door went. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View March 25, 2024 11:18:10 a.m. Eastern (…) WHOOPI GOLDBERG: So I leave it to y'all. What do you think? ANA NAVARRO: Look. I think she's a shapeshifter and she says and does what's convenient for her to say and do when it's convenient. She's from Michigan where the name Romney, which is her name; she used to use -- when she was in Michigan, she was a Romney. When she became the RNC chair and it was under Trump, who didn't like Romney, she took out the word – the name Romney. When it was convenient for her to amplify things that Donald Trump was saying, to amplify the conspiracy theories, to gaslight journalists, to malign journalists, she did that. Now that she's on NBC, she's changed her tune. So, I think that Chuck Todd is very right in calling into question on the air – and by the way, kudos to NBC for having Chuck Todd -- that Chuck Todd had the freedom or felt he had the freedom to say that on the air just following that. The head of NBC News is a good friend of mine from Miami, Cesar Conde. I've known him for over 20 years. I think this was a mistake because you're allowing somebody who was part of the machine – right? -- a figurehead, a household name, reinvent herself. And I do think that there's credibility issues, and it's up to the hosts, the journalists, the staff, the viewers to make it known if they are unhappy about it. ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: Kudos to Kristen Welker, who didn’t – We didn't see all the interview, but she did a great job challenging her. She's an incredible journalist. And one point in that interview Ronna McDaniel starts talking about all these election officials who felt intimidated because they didn't want to certify the election. What she failed to mention is the countless of us who told the truth about the election and faced intimidation and harassment; and people with a lot more power than myself like Shaye Moss and Ruby Freeman and Rusty Bowers, who we know of, who simply did their job to move forward with the election and had their lives torn apart because of it. I feel very strongly, obviously, that there needs to be Republican representation in media. We represent 50 percent of the country, but there are incredible Republicans who never dabbled in this dangerous lie that Joe Biden didn't legitimately win the election who would be far better served for NBC, could offer the same expertise, but with more credibility. I think if people like Chris Christie, Chris Krebs, Sarah Matthews, Mick Mulvaney, Will Hurd. To give her this platform when she was such a contributor. She hosted that insane RNC press conference where they blamed Hugo Chavez, who is no longer with us, for stealing the election. Like, there's such a credibility factor, and I think it was a mistake. [Crosstalk] SARA HAINES: NBC said -- sorry, Sunny. When they announced the hire, they said, we do need to represent more voices. I agree with that, but you cannot have election deniers being given these types of roles in major network news. She was someone that, you know, continues to actually plant, while saying she believes President Biden was elected fairly, also kind of toeing the line with some stories about things that weren't right. And when you have 60 court case that is say there was no evidence otherwise, you have to -- questioning an election is fine. Denying every result that proves you wrong is not fine. So, I think that the only sketchy thing that happened in the election was when the former President asked the secretary of state of Georgia to find 11,000 votes. So, let's come clean on what was sketchy about the election and she should not have gotten [inaudible] – SUNNY HOSTIN: There were other sketchy things that happened, and she was a direct part of it. You know, I think, when journalism is shrinking, especially on linear television, to pay a woman like that $300,000 is obscene. And let's remember that she was the person involved in the 2020 phone call to pressure Michigan county officials to not certify the vote from the Detroit area in particular. Detroit -- the Detroit population is 77.8 percent black. So, she was involved in actively suppressing -- or attempting to suppress the black vote. She also, as you mentioned, said while she was being interviewed by Kristen Welker – and I think there could have been more pushback, but she said, but there were problems with the vote. So, she is still pushing the same exact narrative. She is being rewarded for basically trying to take away the votes of Americans. And I think it's a despicable decision, and Joe and Mika -- Joe Scarborough just this morning said, and Mika said, we hope NBC reconsiders its decision. And I hope they do as well. NAVARRO: Yeah and, you know, one of the things that Chuck Todd says is sometimes we hire folks like this for access, and I don't know what access she has because -- HOSTIN: She got thrown out of the RNC. NAVARRO: Trump threw her out of the RNC and replaced her with an even bigger sycophant. Right? His daughter-in-law. And most of the people who worked with Ronna McDaniel – Ronna Romney McDaniel (…) have gotten thrown out as well. So, I’s not sure what access does she have other than $300,000? GOLDBERG: Well, I'm sure this isn't the end of that story. So, we'll -- when we know more, we'll come back and talk more about it, but not right now because now we're going to break.

CBS Hamas Sympathizer Gets Excited About U.S. Ceasefire Resolution

CBS senior foreign correspondent Holly Williams positively beaming on Friday when she shared the news that the Biden administration would be putting forward a resolution in the United Nations Security Council calling for a ceasefire in the Israel/Hamas War. Of course, Williams was less concerned about the Israeli and American hostages being held in Hamas captivity than she was about getting Israel to stop killing terrorists. In leading into the segment co-host Tony Dokoupil tried to ensure that the hostages remained a central part of the equation but Williams seemingly wasn’t interested; keeping her focus on getting Israel to stop their campaign to eradicate Hamas. Williams admitted she didn’t know if Biden’s resolution would amount to anything substantive, but she was hyped that it seemed like he was starting to abandon Israel: DOKOUPIL: We're hearing that there is optimism about a potential ceasefire and hostage release. How quickly could it happen? WILLIAMS: Well, I don't know the answer to that. But what we are seeing is a kind of change in the U.S.'s approach and language. So, we've seen the U.S. previously veto three separate U.N. Security Council resolutions calling for a ceasefire. Now, the U.S. has drafted its own cease-fire resolution that's expected to be voted on later on today. And it used much stronger language than we've seen previously from the U.S.: “an immediate and sustained ceasefire.” “That said, we have every reason to be skeptical,” she tempered her excitement.     Dokoupil responded by pointing out that the terrorists have “been rejecting deals” the entire time while Israel had only rejected the most recent one Hamas had countered with. “What about this resolution would potentially move either party closer to yes?” he wondered. Williams still didn’t have an answer, but she found comfort in the U.S. beginning to turn on Israel: Well, I guess one of the questions is like -- why has the U.S. position changed? Right? And how much influence will that have? I guess when it comes to the why, maybe it's the kind of horrific images that we're seeing coming out of Gaza on an almost daily basis now. The World Health Organization says that up to 60 percent of children under the age of five in Gaza are now malnourished. “Now, no matter who you ultimately blame for that, and people have different positions, it's deeply distressing. And it ups the pressure on the U.S. to do something,” she proclaimed, trying to distance Hamas from the responsibility for starting the war. Williams also seemed to be shocked or possibly disheartened by Israeli resolve to eradicate Hamas: I don't think that many people in the U.S. government thought back in October that we would still be here in March, that the war would still be ongoing, and that Blinken would be in the Middle East for the sixth time since the war began. She also called for rewarding Hamas for October 7 by giving Palestinians their own country and pushed Hamas propaganda about a pre-war “occupation” in Gaza (Israel had left Gaza in the early 2000s and in response, Palestinians elected Hamas to rule them): …there needs to be a two-state solution. That the Palestinians need their own state in Gaza and the West Bank because it gives them, you know, hope for a better future. And the argument is that when Palestinians suffer the daily humiliations of occupation, it helps kind of push them into arms of Hamas. What she didn’t care to admit was that international law was a fallacy and a U.N. resolution calling for a ceasefire didn’t really mean anything. For a ceasefire to take effect both sides needed to agree, and in this case, both sides seemed to be playing for keeps this time. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: CBS Mornings March 22, 2024 8:02:15 a.m. Eastern TONY DOKOUPIL: We’re going to begin with new U.S. pressure on Israel to pause its war in Gaza. Secretary of State Antony Blinken is in Israel today pushing for alternatives to a ground offensive in the city of Rafah. And he says they're getting closer to a potential temporary ceasefire deal which could include the release of Israeli hostages. At the same time, the U.S. is sponsoring a resolution at the U.N. calling for an immediate and sustained ceasefire after vetoing previous ceasefire resolutions. Our senior foreign correspondent Holly Williams has been covering this conflict since it began in October and is here in studio with us. Holly, so great to have you here. You've been reporting on this for months now. We're hearing that there is optimism about a potential ceasefire and hostage release. How quickly could it happen? HOLLY WILLIAMS: Well, I don't know the answer to that. But what we are seeing is a kind of change in the U.S.'s approach and language. So, we've seen the U.S. previously veto three separate U.N. Security Council resolutions calling for a ceasefire. Now, the U.S. has drafted its own cease-fire resolution that's expected to be voted on later on today. And it used much stronger language than we've seen previously from the U.S.: “an immediate and sustained ceasefire.” That said, we have every reason to be skeptical. DOKOUPIL: Well, because you got Hamas which has apparently been rejecting deals, you got Israel which is apparently unwilling to accept the deal as it currently stands. What about this resolution would potentially move either party closer to yes? WILLIAMS: Well, I guess one of the questions is like -- why has the U.S. position changed? Right? And how much influence will that have? I guess when it comes to the why, maybe it's the kind of horrific images that we're seeing coming out of Gaza on an almost daily basis now. The World Health Organization says that up to 60 percent of children under the age of five in Gaza are now malnourished. Now, no matter who you ultimately blame for that, and people have different positions, it's deeply distressing. And it ups the pressure on the U.S. to do something. NATE BURLESON: Okay. Speaking of that pressure, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, he promised a major ground incursion of the southern Gaza city of Rafah. President Biden says that would be a mistake. How would that impact the relationship between Israel and the U.S.? WILLIAMS: Look, it's a really tricky one, isn't it? I mean, the U.S. is not just Israel's most important ally. It's the most powerful country in the world. So, you assume that there's a lot of leverage there. That said, I don't think that many people in the U.S. government thought back in October that we would still be here in March, that the war would still be ongoing, and that Blinken would be in the Middle East for the sixth time since the war began. So, there are limits to U.S. leverage. MICHELLE MILLER: You know, Holly, you've spoken to both sides, Israelis, Palestinians. What are they saying about this in the midst of it all going on? WILLIAMS: So, look, this current war was sparked by the horrors perpetrated on October 7th. But these two sides have been locked in a cycle of violence for decades. And many people on both sides when they've experienced violence, when they've lost loved ones, they're pushed to more extreme positions and more extreme behavior. So, how do you get out of that cycle of violence, right? Now, the U.S. position -- and this is shared by a lot of countries, a lot of people -- is there needs to be a two-state solution. That the Palestinians need their own state in Gaza and the West Bank because it gives them, you know, hope for a better future. And the argument is that when Palestinians suffer the daily humiliations of occupation, it helps kind of push them into arms of Hamas. But when you look at recent polls, it is a minority of people on both sides who actually want a two-state solution. You know, and those numbers are way down from ten years ago. DOKOUPIL: Wow. WILLIAMS: So, it seems as if what people on both sides actually agree on is that they're kind of resigned to violence. DOKOUPIL: Wow. BURLESON: Good to see you here at the table. Your coverage has been incredibly eye-opening. Thank you.

ABC, NBC Take Ad Money from TikTok, Omit User Threatening to Kill Senator

On Wednesday, North Carolina Republican Senator Thom Tillis released a disturbing voicemail his office received from a radicalized TikTok user who threatened to kill him and chop up his body. Despite the disturbing nature of the message, none of the Big Three broadcast networks (ABC, CBS, and NBC) decided to give the story any airtime on their Wednesday evening and Thursday morning flagship newscasts. They refused to cover the threat, and yet, ABC’s Good Morning America and NBC’s Today took money from the controversial spying and social engineering app and aired advertisements talking about how great TikTok was. Each ad lasted 30 seconds and featured feel-good, manipulative, user testimonials. ABC’s shared the story of Jasmine Vega who used the embattled, China-owned social media network to help her family’s restaurant. NBC’s had the story of Sarah Escherish whose grandma used the app at her senior living facility to make videos. What they refused to share with viewers was this message left for Tillis: “Okay, listen. If you ban TikTok I will find you and shoot you. [Laughter] That's people's jobs. And that's my only entertainment. And people make money off there too, you know. I’m tryin’ to get rich like that. Anyways, I will shoot you and find you and cut you into pieces. [Laughter] Bye!”   This is a voicemail my office received last night. TikTok's misinformation campaign is pushing people to call their members of Congress, and callers like this who communicate threats against elected officials could be committing a federal crime. The Communist-Chinese aligned… pic.twitter.com/X9uW03neqw — Senator Thom Tillis (@SenThomTillis) March 20, 2024   The silence from the broadcast networks on the story was a continuation of their blackout from earlier this month, when they refused to report on other death threats and threats of suicide members of Congress were receiving from TikTok users. In sharp contrast to the broadcast networks, Fox News Channel’s Special Report ran an entire segment on the threat and the congressional proposals to ban apps not divested from countries with adversarial relationships with America. “You know, we have been hearing a lot of stories from Senate offices about some TikTok users calling and threatening these senators. Well tonight, Senator Thom Tillis is actually releasing audio of a voicemail he received from what appears to be a young woman threatening to kill him if he bans TikTok,” announced congressional correspondent Aishah Hasnie as she shared parts of the audio.     She also included comments from Tillis. “Does it actually help their case? It hurts their case. [Transition] Shame on TikTok for not discouraging it,” the Senator told the press in a gaggle. In a reply to Tillis, TikTok claimed they did not support what the caller did. “Threats like this are unacceptable and we condemn this in the strongest possible terms,” they said on X. Hasnie added that the fate of TikTok in America was still up in the air as Congress was still plotting the course: Well, right now the Senate is moving cautiously on that House bill which requires the app divorce its Chinese owner ByteDance or face a ban. Today, senators got a classified briefing on TikTok and we could see soon CEO Shou Chew on the hill again as Chairwoman Maria Cantwell of the Commerce Committee says she wants a TikTok hearing, too. Her concern is whether the bill can hold up against lawsuits. (…) But Bret, nobody, not even Majority Leader Chuck Schumer is giving anyone any clues about when we could finally see some action on the floor. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: Fox News Channel’s Special Report March 21, 2024 6:06:14 p.m. Eastern BRET BAIER: Tonight, we’re getting a close look how seriously some fans of the social media app TikTok are taking the congressional effort that could result in its banishment. Congressional correspondent Aishah Hasnie is on Capitol Hill this evening with this story. Good evening, Aishah. AISHAH HASNIE: Good evening to you, Bret. You know, we have been hearing a lot of stories from Senate offices about some TikTok users calling and threatening these senators. Well tonight, Senator Thom Tillis is actually releasing audio of a voice mail he received from what appears to be a young woman threatening to kill him if he bans TikTok. Listen to this. [Cuts to video] TIKTOK USER: Okay, listen. If you ban TikTok I will find you and shoot you. [Laughter] That's people's jobs. And that's my only entertainment. [Transition] Anyways, I will shoot you and find you and cut you into pieces. [Laughter] Bye! SEN. THOM TILLIS (R-NC): Does it actually help their case? It hurts their case. [Transition] Shame on TikTok for not discouraging it. [Cuts back to live] HASNIE: So, TikTok is responding to this tonight, posting on X: “Threats like this are unacceptable and we condemn this in the strongest possible terms.” Adding, that users who do want to speak out should do in a respectful manner. Well, right now the Senate is moving cautiously on that House bill which requires the app divorce its Chinese owner ByteDance or face a ban. Today, senators got a classified briefing on TikTok and we could see soon CEO Shou Chew on the hill again as Chairwoman Maria Cantwell of the Commerce Committee says she wants a TikTok hearing, too. Her concern is whether the bill can hold up against lawsuits. [Cuts to video] SEN. MARIA CANTWELL (D-WA): The whole issue is constitutionality, making sure it upholds in court. We want our government to have a very strong tool to stop nefarious actions, so the question is how do we get that? The House has one proposal. We’re going to look at all of these. [Cuts back to live] HASNIE: But Bret, nobody, not even Majority Leader Chuck Schumer is giving anyone any clues about when we could finally see some action on the floor. Bret. BAIER: Aishah Hasnie live on the hill. Aishah, thanks.