https://newsbusters.org/ en https://newsbusters.org/blogs/business/joseph-vazquez/2026/07/05/end-nye-ms-now-trots-out-science-guy-back-mamdani MS Now treating the apocalyptic ramblings of Bill Nye — the so-called “Science Guy” — like serious scholarship is a criminal offense against its viewers’ intelligence.  MS Now Reports’ fill-in anchor Antonia Hylton brought on Nye July 2 to put the “climate change” whammy on the summer heat currently gripping the East Coast. In addition, she also teed him up to smack conservatives tearing into communist NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani playing nanny by instructing his denizens to keep thermostats at 78 degrees or people will die. “The Department of Energy has the same guidance. Is the science on Mamdani’s side here,” Hylton led with the leading question. “Of course,” screeched the make-believe climatologist with a Bachelor's Degree in Mechanical Engineering, “Everybody, if you don't run the air conditioning systems as strongly as powerfully, you will use less electricity. That's everybody. That's not rocket surgery. That's intuitive.” Rocket surgery? It’s “rocket science,” genius! Nye proceeded to regurgitate his typical spiel about how the “planet’s on f–ing fire” for the umpteenth time: What I think’s happening with these heat events is we're going to get used to them in the same way we used to be used to snow days where people just stay home, just don't go — and some people venture out in the snow, but people become less productive, less business gets done, and so on. I think the same thing is going to happen with these heat events. But it is — it is very, very serious because of public health and so on. And there's a problem we have now where we're using a tremendous amount of electricity to not only air condition our living spaces, but also to run these data centers. This is a serious biz. .@MSNOWNews actually treating @BillNye like he's a serious scientific authority on anything is a criminal offense against viewers' intelligence quotients. pic.twitter.com/Rcw8PNXl2d — Joe Vazquez (@JV3MRC) July 2, 2026 Did he forget that the North East and Mid-Atlantic just had their coldest winter in about 20 years last season?  But it got worse. Nye — who went viral for saying during a podcast that climate change meant the U.S. was experiencing a “Pearl Harbor” moment every week in 2019 — proceeded to try bolstering his word salad by comparing two straws of different sizes and arguing “more liquid” can go through “this big straw, than this little straw. I think intuitively we could all accept that.” No kidding, Captain Obvious! “Well, the same is true of power. The same is true of power lines.” It’s almost as if mechanical engineers are too dumb to realize that more power naturally necessitates building more efficient power lines through capacity scaling! Using Nye’s logic, adaptability all of a sudden became stagnant as humanity just hopelessly waits for its power grids to blow up. “Science Guy’s here,” boasted Nye. Great. Now when does he leave? As Climate Depot founder Marc Morano stated in comments to MRC Business, "Wow. It's been a while. I haven't seen Bill Nye paraded around by the media as a 'climate expert' in many years, but he's back! Nye is really into recycling his old talking points." Morano noted that "EPA data has consistently shown the 1930s heatwaves in the U.S. were much more severe than any heatwaves since and NOAA data reveals that 76% of U.S. states recorded their high-temperature records before 1955." At the end of his segment, Nye suggested that the solution to the eco-Ragnarok was climate-conscious voting in the upcoming midterm elections. Morano mocked Nye's not-so-subtle political agenda: "Vote yourself better weather and fewer heatwaves! The power of the ballot box will alter the Earth's climate, according to Bill Nye. Yawn." It's also worth revisiting the flub Hylton made at the beginning of her segment by using a rhetorical sleight-of-hand by hitting conservative critics of Mamdani’s thermostat prescription with the Department of Energy. The DOE recommendations for 75-78 degrees in thermostat settings were about saving on energy costs for consumers, as USA Today pointed out June 30 — not because Americans turning their ACs on to full-blast meant the grid was at risk of overloading! July 5th, 2026 10:57 AM Joseph Vazquez 295832 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/mark-finkelstein/2026/07/05/cnns-cornish-allows-accusation-trump-corruption-shuts-down On Friday's CNN This Morning, host Audie Cornish discussed declining American pride and the nation's 250th birthday with CNN political historian Prof. Leah Wright, whose interests include "modern African American history, with an emphasis on race and political ideology," and Alexander Heffner, host of PBS's The Open Mind. Heffner critiqued Trump's alleged corruption, citing "a president who's flying on a plane, an Air Force One recently debuted, that is a gift from Qatar." Cornish let that proceed without objection. But then he tried broadening the lens beyond Trump, to be fair and balanced: "Let's just be honest about this. We have to be equal opportunity critics, and the golden rule of American political life ought to be intellectual honesty." The word "Pelosi" was barely out of Heffner's mouth when Cornish emphatically shut him down: "You're [getting into] modern politics, and I brought you guys on because it's been a time for historians." The ban on invoking "modern politics" was invisible during the Trump critique. But Cornish snapped it into place the moment self-enrichment talk shifted to the longtime Democratic leader. Cornish imagined group chats among historians were a "mess" -- as if there isn't a near-liberal monopoly on campus. She mentioned the controversy over "the 1619 Project" at The New York Times, which the Biden administration wanted imposed on the public schools. The 1619 Project labored to pin the founding of America to the arrival of the first slaves on American soil, while Morning Joe's Jon Meacham just pushed it forward to 1965 and the enactment of the Voting Rights Act and immigration legislation. Wright pointed not to 1776, but to Frederick Douglass's 1852 July 5 speech on the 76th anniversary of the Declaration. Douglass, she said, called out "this idea of the hypocrisy of liberty, a nation for liberty and justice for all, that is intimately, violently rejecting that premise for the bulk of the people. So that becomes the story of the nation. That's the one that we remember." To his credit, Heffner stuck with good old 1776. CNN's @AudieCornish Shuts Down Pelosi Self-Enrichment Talk — After Trump's Alleged Corruption Gets Full Hearing pic.twitter.com/tzHEc51nfs — Mark Finkelstein (@markfinkelstein) July 3, 2026 Wright worked in another shot at American history: "Around America's anniversaries, there tends to be a push from administrations to whitewash American history, to focus simply on the great acts, but of very specific great acts by specific great people, predominantly white men." On CNN This Morning, intellectual honesty proved selective. Trump-era self-enrichment is an acceptable topic for complaint, while any Pelosi parallel draws an immediate history-only timeout. In a segment ostensibly about American pride on the eve of the 250th, Cornish and Wright delivered the very cynicism that helps explain the slumping Gallup numbers. July 5th, 2026 6:41 AM Mark Finkelstein 295842 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/siena-do/2026/07/05/odonnell-slams-counterfeit-air-force-one-teddy-roosevelt-would-be President Donald Trump just redecorated the Boeing jet gifted to him by the Qatari Emir, and the liberal media did what it always does - throw a tantrum about it. On Wednesday’s episode of MS NOW’s The Last Word, host Lawrence O’Donnell and his squinty eyes glared through the camera and proclaimed "Donald Trump flaunted the single biggest piece of corruption in American history. Donald Trump showed off the largest object to ever be corruptly sought and accepted by an American politician." “The saying, ‘When you’ve got it, flaunt it,’ was never meant as advice for politicians,” O’Donnell began his rant over Trump, who he’s so obsessed with that he probably dreams about him. Where was his outrage when Jill Biden received an 18-carat gold and diamond necklace, also from the Emir of Qatar? That's (D)ifferent.    “The country will never get to fly on that plane,” O’Donnell lamented, like he thinks that any American can just walk onto Air Force One and fly wherever they want. Then, he connected Trump and dictators again: “Donald Trump said today that he went to a foreign dictator and asked him for a plane.” In the clip of Trump that O’Donnell used as backup for these claims, Trump himself said that he asked to borrow the jet “for a period of time” while the other Boeing 747 planes were under construction. O'Donnell claimed the president "has two perfectly capable and functioning 747's," but they're over 35 years old and increasingly obsolete and expensive to maintain. But O’Donnell simply couldn’t entertain any rational claims for a new plane: Donald Trump wanted one [plane] that he could take home with him. And so the scheme that a Democratic Congress must find a way to prevent is for Donald Trump to take that 747 with him as part of his so-called Presidential Library, and then use it to fly wherever he wants to go after his time in office. It's an unprecedented arrangement, but it's not some national emergency that Democrats "must find a way to prevent" it. O'Donnell's rant President Trump used it for the first time this past week to fly to the Teddy Roosevelt Presidential Library dedication in North Dakota, which O’Donnell of course used as another avenue of attack: Teddy Roosevelt would be horrified by Donald Trump's mode of transportation today. Teddy Roosevelt would have immediately urged the impeachment of a president who solicited a gift from anyone, especially a foreign dictator. On the contrary, Teddy Roosevelt was the first President to fly on an airplane in October of 1910. He also received many gifts from people O’Donnell would probably classify as “foreign dictators,” including the warmongering Emperor of Ethiopia and the rulers of Russia and Japan. “'Offensive and contemptible.' That is exactly what Teddy Roosevelt surely would have said about the 'screaming vulgarity of the foolish, spread-eagled orator' flying on a counterfeit Air Force One today,” O’Donnell added. Either O’Donnell was being intentionally obtuse or intentionally obfuscating the facts; there’s nothing “counterfeit” about the plane. Any fixed-wing aircraft carrying the President of the United States IS Air Force One. The left hates Trump so much that they can’t stand to see anything good happening for him, even as he represents them and all other Americans on the world stage. Instead, they’ll drag him down and pray that his new plane crashes and burns, along with the country at large. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: MS NOW's The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell 7/1/26 10:01:53 LAWRENCE O'DONNELL: The saying, 'When you've got it, flaunt it' was never meant as advice for politicians.  But today, Donald Trump flaunted the single biggest piece of corruption in American history. Donald Trump showed off the largest object to ever be corruptly sought and accepted by an American politician. [Cut to video] DONALD TRUMP: The head of Boeing said this is considered the best 747 they've ever built.  And I went to Qatar. I said, 'I'd like to use it for a period of time because the other ones, as you know, are under construction.' They'll be here in two years. And because, you know, the plane is 35 years old. So I said I'd like to use it.  And the Emir, Tamim, who's a great gentleman, he said, 'No, no, I'd like to make a contribution to the country.' [Cut back to live] O'DONNELL: The country isn't going to use that 400 million dollar gift that the Emir gave to Donald Trump. The plan is for Donald Trump to be the only person who ever uses that plane. That is the corrupt plan for that plane.  The United States of America already has two perfectly capable and functioning 747's in service right now as Air Force One. And the federal government has ordered two more Boeing 747's to replace those two versions of Air Force One that are currently operating.  But Donald Trump wanted one that he could take home with him.  And so the scheme that a Democratic Congress must find a way to prevent is for Donald Trump to take that 747 with him as part of his so-called presidential library, and then use it to fly wherever he wants to go after his time in office. The country will never get to fly on that plane, but the country actually ended up having to pay for that plane, hundreds of millions of dollars, at least, to outfit it as a workable version of Air Force One.  (...) 10:05:10 p.m. O'DONNELL: And suddenly, for the first time in world history, a President of the United States was given an airplane from another country.  Donald Trump said today that he went to a foreign dictator and asked him for a plane. And he used that plane for the first time today to fly to a dedication of the Theodore Roosevelt Presidential Library. Now, it might seem a little late to just now be dedicating a presidential library to someone who was president more than 100 years ago. But presidential libraries are actually a relatively new thing in presidential history, beginning with President Herbert Hoover, who left office on Inauguration day in 1933.  Teddy Roosevelt was a rich New York Republican like Donald Trump, who served as president from 1901 to 1909.  In a first for presidential library dedication speeches, Donald Trump today did not quote the President, who was being commemorated. Because the problem for Donald Trump today, in quoting Teddy Roosevelt, is Teddy Roosevelt saying things like 'No man can be a good citizen who is not a good husband and a good father who is not honest in his dealings with other men and women, faithful to his friends, and fearless in the presence of his foes who has not got a sound heart, a sound mind, and a sound body.' Teddy Roosevelt would be horrified by Donald Trump's mode of transportation today. Teddy Roosevelt would have immediately urged the impeachment of a president who solicited a gift from anyone, especially a foreign dictator. And Teddy Roosevelt would have despised the small-mindedness of Donald Trump because it was Teddy Roosevelt who said, 'The screaming vulgarity of the foolish spread-eagle orator who is continually yelling defiance at Europe, praising everything American, good and bad, and resenting the introduction of any reform because it has previously been tried successfully abroad, is offensive and contemptible to the last degree.' 'Offensive and contemptible.' That is exactly what Teddy Roosevelt surely would have said about the 'screaming vulgarity of the foolish, spread-eagled orator' flying on a counterfeit Air Force One today.  July 5th, 2026 6:11 AM Siena Do 295824 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/pj-gladnick/2026/07/04/politico-laughably-kvetches-about-america-250-fireworks-pollution If you want to know why Politico risked the inevitable mockery that will ensue by whining absurdly about the supposed dangers posed to the environment by the America 250 fireworks the answer is easily supplied by simply reading the first word of the title of their Friday KvetchFest, "Trump plans record fireworks show, internal docs warn of smoky skies." Substitute the name of any Democrat president such as Clinton or Obama or Autopen and the silly story by the Politico troika of Alex Guillen, Miranda Willson, and Ariel Wittenberg would have been nonexistent. Yes, they just can't allow President Donald Trump to enjoy along with thousands of spectators what they consider to be a triumphal moment without raining on the parade. TDS is just that powerful, especially at Politico. Now let us watch the Politico team make an attempt at a thin veneer of concern over supposed fireworks pollution despite us (and them) knowing what this is really all about: Scientists have well documented the soot and heavy metal pollution that can spike severely in the wake of pyrotechnic displays, and the world-record-setting number of fireworks lined up for July 4 will mean an equally large jump in pollution, according to experts and internal NPS documents reviewed by POLITICO. There are no indications that the administration plans to suggest masking or other personal protection for revelers viewing the fireworks from the nation’s front lawn. And the Environmental Protection Agency said tracking the air quality impacts of the fireworks isn’t their jurisdiction. Any warnings by the government for people to mask up in the wake of the useless Covid mask warnings would be rightly ignored and/or laughed at. The good news is that the dirty air doesn’t linger too long. One study found that particulate matter from July Fourth fireworks remained elevated for about 24 hours across 315 different monitoring sites. On average, the fireworks displays increased pollution by 42 percent. But after a day, fireworks pollution dissipates and usually blows away or settles into water and soil within a day. Wow! So just wait for the wind to blow away whatever air pollution there is. It sounds much less than terrifying. The drought means that pollutants may linger longer in the Potomac than they would under normal conditions, said Tyler Frankel, an associate environmental science professor at the University of Mary Washington. Contaminants can easily get trapped in the river near Theodore Roosevelt Island due to “tidal slosh,” a phenomenon where the water flows both upstream and downstream, Frankel said. Amphibians and juvenile fish are particularly vulnerable to perchlorates, compounds used in fireworks to enable a rapid burn but that can also disrupt animals’ developmental processes. If as few as just ONE Delta Smelt dies due to the America 250 fireworks, Trump must be held to account! Impeachment? The Politico litany of dire America 250 fireworks threats to the environment and health continues on and on and on for our amusement.  Here are just a few more of the highlights spurred on by their derangement over You-Know-Who: Other animals at risk include ospreys, iconic fish-eating birds that are currently in the midst of breeding season and are easily spooked by loud noises. ...Fireworks also rain down small but potentially potent amounts of heavy metals that are used to create vibrant colors but also pose serious health risks. ...No one has yet done epidemiological studies to look at whether hospital admissions for asthma or other cardiovascular and respiratory ailments increase after fireworks events, the kind of research that has been performed on wildfire smoke and ambient pollution. ...Observing the show from a greater distance would reduce exposure. So would staying inside and keeping windows closed. An indoor air filter will scrub out particles. And all those N95 masks left lying around from the pandemic would be effective, too. ... An organizer with Moms Clean Air Force who also has asthma, Schmitz spent last July Fourth “inside with a mask on, leaning over my air purifier struggling to breathe and weighing if I needed to go to the hospital.” Will any of the Politico crew need to be mental health hospitalized (for TDS) if they spot anybody enjoying the terrific America 250 fireworks display? July 4th, 2026 10:13 PM P.J. Gladnick 295844 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/mark-finkelstein/2026/07/04/morning-joe-historian-meacham-250th-america-was-really-founded On Tuesday's Morning Joe, as the nation approaches its 250th anniversary, historian Jon Meacham delivered a revisionist riff on the founding of America.  He actually began well: "The Declaration and the Constitution codified the centrality and sanctity of the individual and the equality, not of outcome and not of success, but equality before God and before the bar of history and before the courts of every individual soul." So far, so good: a clear rejection of the "equity" mindset that demands equal results rather than equal opportunity under the law.  But Meacham quickly pivoted: "There's a very good case to be made, I think, that we were really founded in 1965. That's when a multiracial, multiethnic democracy came more fully into being with the Immigration and Nationality Act, with the Voting Rights Act. And so we're really about 60 years old." This is how many on the modern left approach American history. The New York Times’ 1619 Project sought to push the nation’s true founding backward to 1619, declaring the arrival of the first slaves as America’s real beginning. Now, Meacham effectively pushes the founding forward to 1965, to celebrate the Immigration and Nationality Act and Voting Rights Act.  The common thread is a desire to redefine America’s origins in the service of contemporary progressive priorities. In Meacham's telling, the real founding occurred in the Great Society era. The actual Declaration and Constitution get downgraded to a kind of rough draft, with 1965 supplying the corrected, expanded edition. This fits neatly with the narrative pushed by outlets like the New York Times. As Mara Gay of the Times editorial board suggested to Meacham, today's multiracial left is the true inheritor of the Founders' tradition.  Yet that same left aggressively champions DEI initiatives pushing "equity" — precisely the equality of outcome rather than opportunity that Meacham himself just said the Founders rejected. Meacham correctly identified the principle, but then, by situating the founding in 1965, seemed to hand the inheritance to the very movement working to dismantle it. @Morning_Joe Historian Meacham on 250th: America 'Was Really Founded In 1965' pic.twitter.com/iaGocOFlDR — Mark Finkelstein (@markfinkelstein) July 1, 2026 As the country prepares to mark 250 years since 1776, expect more attempts to shift the focal point to the 1960s. The actual founding documents, and the generation that risked everything for self-government, deserve better than to be treated as a preliminary sketch awaiting the real work of 1965. Note: Meacham, an Episcopalian, offered a distinctly Protestant reading of history. He praised the Gutenberg press because “you didn’t have to depend on [Catholic] monks" to do illuminated manuscripts, celebrated the Protestant Reformation, in bringing scripture into the vernacular [from the Catholic Latin], as an important step toward democratization, and decried the old vertical order in which “Popes and princes” ruled over subjects.  In a discussion of America’s founding principles, many Catholics are apt to view Meacham's references as gratuitous critiques of their tradition. Here's the transcript. MS NOW Morning Joe 7/1/26 7:23 am EDT MIKE BARNICLE: Could you, in your, tell us what your definition today is of being an American?  JON MEACHAM: The American, right. We are blessed to be in a country that was part of an unfolding drama in the West from Magna Carta and Gutenberg forward.  You know, the invention of movable type, which democratizes information. You didn't have to depend on monks to do an illuminated manuscript. Anyone could go to a printer shop and print an idea and get it out there. It was the earliest form of the internet.  The Glorious Revolution in England, which created a balanced constitution between King and Parliament — a vital reminder of how we have to keep those things in balance. The Protestant Reformation, you know, the translation of scripture into the vernacular. This whole idea, this whole shift — that the Constitution and the Declaration were, I think, the clearest political embodiments of the world being organized vertically—where Popes and princes were at the top and we were subjects.  But the world was becoming more horizontal. We were born with the capacity to determine our own destinies. And what the Declaration and the Constitution did is, they codified the centrality and sanctity of the individual, and the equality—not of outcome and not of success— but equality before God, and before the bar of history, and before the courts, of every individual soul. MARA GAY: You know, John, we're in a moment where it feels sometimes as though there's a great battle that we're in the midst of, between a pro-democracy movement, of multiracial democracy, that claims to be the inheritor of what the Founding Fathers have given us of this great tradition. And then there are others, and you mentioned blood and soil, who want to limit what that means, and the definition of what it means to be American.  I guess, I wonder who you think actually is the inheritor of this American tradition, and how we should think about the radicalism of the Founding fathers in this moment? MEACHAM: You know, we talk about, directly to your point, we talk about this as the 250th anniversary, which it is, of the Second Continental Congress passing the Declaration of Independence, fully beginning the Revolutionary War, which ultimately leads, in 1787 through 1789, to the framing of the Constitution, the inauguration of George Washington, and the beginning of what we would see as a recognizable experiment in self-government.  Except, that a lot of people weren't included in that. And in that important sentence about all men being created equal, men had a very particular application in that era.  It is a very — there's a very good case to be made, I think, that we were really founded in 1965. That, that's when a multiracial, multiethnic democracy came more fully into being with the Immigration and Nationality Act, with the Voting Rights Act.  And so, we're really about 60 years old. July 4th, 2026 8:36 PM Mark Finkelstein 295805 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/steve-malzberg/2026/07/04/cnns-hunt-presses-michigan-democrat-abdul-el-sayed-israel The Democratic primary for U.S. Senate in Michigan has a trio of candidates on the ballot, including radical left-winger Dr. Abdul El-Sayed. Thursday afternoon, El-Sayed was a guest on CNN's The Arena, where Host Kasie Hunt, treated him like a Republican, repeatedly raising issues that made El-Sayed uncomfortable, and pressing him when he didn't answer the question asked. It was very unusual. Hunt began by asking if he can win a general election in the purple state of Michigan should he win the primary, noting some party leaders are concerned about that. When he stressed he'd support "Medicare for All" (nationalized health care) as a Senator, Hunt fired back, "The reality is there's no way Medicare for All passes Congress if Democrats don't control the Senate. And if you don't win that Senate seat in Michigan, it's very hard to see how Democrats win the Senate at all." Hunt then moved on to El-Sayed's criticism of President Trump, noting that he won Michigan in 2024, "Is there anything that he's done in this second term in office that you can identify as being good for the country?" Wow. This from a woman who routinely criticizes the President. Hunt then turned her attention to comments he has made about women and his opponent, Congresswoman Haley Stevens, and played an ad attacking him for it. Rather than address its contents, and Hunt's question of whether he regrets things he's said about women, his response was to point out who he says paid for the ad, UDP, an AIPAC super PAC. This led to Hunt to the topic of Israel, and she continued to press her guest. HUNT: Do you believe Israel has a right to exist? EL-SAYED: It's interesting because nobody's ever asked me whether or not I believe Palestine has a right to exist.... Israel exists. HUNT: You say it exists, but does it have a right to? EL-SAYED: I didn't say that. I just said the question of Israel's existence is not a question. I'm not I'm not going to play this gotcha game about whether or not it has a right to exist. HUNT: You're not going to play the gotcha game, but you're not going to say you think Israel has a right to exist. EL-SAYED: The question about whether or not Israel has a right to exist is actually quite secondary to whether or not they have a right to our tax dollars. And people don't ask that question in good faith. Then Hunt pressed him on his deleted tweets which called for defunding police, which really hit a nerve. Hunt asked: "I also wanted to ask you about some of the tweets that you deleted, as you were in the course of this race, just before, around this question of defunding the police, this is also something likely to come up in a general election should you win this primary. Do you stand by what you had previously said that that police,  in support of defunding the police, or do you believe police should be funded? She later asked, "Why did you delete the tweets"? El-Sayed shot back: "I deleted all the tweets because I didn't want them to be taken out of context, like this, o that you could distract from the actual conversation that Michiganders really want to have." Then more pressing from Hunt. HUNT: I think the question is just if you're leading, would you fight to defund the police or would you not? EL-SAYED: I've already told you what I did. Judge me by my work....And I think this debate about 2020 and the ways that tweets are going to play are really nice on CNN, if you want to get clicks. HUNT: So voters shouldn't look at the fact that you deleted the tweets as evidence that you no longer were for  the things that you said then? After more back and forth Hunt concluded with, "I understand, but you deleted the tweets, right? That's what I'm asking you. I'm asking you about an action that you took, okay." And after asking if Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), who has endorsed El-Sayed, will be campaigning with him, she asked him about one of his earliest supporters Hasan Piker, who has said America deserved 9/11: "You also, of course, have campaigned alongside Hasan Piker. Do you believe that the statements that he has made about September 11th are accurate?" An impressive display by Hunt, but why? Maybe she too believes that if El-Sayed wins the primary, he and the Democrats will lose the Michigan Senate seat they currently hold. July 4th, 2026 2:42 PM Steve Malzberg 295843 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/jeffrey-lord/2026/07/04/fourth-july-ben-franklin-and-celebration-free-press The First Amendment to the United States Constitution addresses the subject of free speech head on. As follows: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” This reminder comes as, for the 250th time, America gets ready to celebrate the Fourth of July. And in that doing, it is decidedly worth a look back to see the thoughts of the nation’s Founding Fathers when it comes to a free press. Or, as it is referred to in today’s world, “the media.” It is particularly worthwhile to take a look back at the writings and activities of one Founder in particular. That would be the venerable and wise Benjamin Franklin. The liberal journalist and author Walter Isaacson wrote a decidedly noteworthy book on old Ben. The one that is appropriate for this annual July 4th celebration is Benjamin Franklin: An American Life. Isaacson makes a point of discussing Franklin’s relationship to the creation of a free press and the larger world we call the media.  Key to this creation was what Franklin termed “The Junto Club”. The Benjamin Franklin Historical Society defines the Junto Club as follows: “In the fall of 1727 Benjamin Franklin and a group of friends founded the Junto Club also known as the Leather Apron Club. The 12 members were tradesmen and artisans who met Friday evenings to discuss issues of morals, politics or natural philosophy. The club lasted 38 years. Franklin proposed that the group be formed of “ingenious men –a physician, a mathematician, a geographer, a natural philosopher, a botanist, a chemist, and a mechanician (engineer)”. Isaacson also notes: “Franklin was doing modestly well as one of three printers in a town that would naturally have supported only two. But he had learned from his apprentice days in Boston that true success would come if he had not only a printing operation but also his own content and distribution network.” Franklin had competition in this area, however. A publisher named Andrew Bradford. Isaacson writes: “Franklin decided to take Bradford on, and over the next decade he would succeed by building a media conglomerate that included production capacity (printing operations, franchised printers in other cities), products (a newspaper, magazine, almanac), content (his own writings, his alter ego Poor Richard’s, and those of his Junto), and distribution (eventually the whole of the colonial postal system).” In other words, long, long before the arrival of the 20th and 21st century and the media companies built in today’s world by men with names like Rupert Murdoch (Fox), Chris Ruddy (Newsmax), William S. Paley (CBS), David Sarnoff (NBC) or Bill Gates (Microsoft) and Steve Jobs (Apple), there was old Ben Franklin in his very competitive fashion launching a media company of his own. Designed specifically by Franklin to embrace the technology of the day (printers), and then content (a newspaper, magazine and an almanac.) Now? So now America - and the modern world - swims in a media ocean of newspapers, television and radio networks. Not to mention computers! The technological descendants of Ben’s printers. The bottom line? Even though there are those griping about this, that or another media outlet (including me!), this July 4th is a good moment to stop and understand just how fortunate we Americans are. Fortunate to live in a country where a free press and all that that means -- for the good, bad and indifferent -- allows them to read, write and broadcast what they chose. Said another way? Long live a free press. And God Bless America. Happy Fourth of July.  July 4th, 2026 1:30 PM Jeffrey Lord 295845 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/alex-christy/2026/07/04/washpost-seeks-condemn-cruel-picture-natives-declaration On Tuesday, Washington Post local breaking news reporter Dana Hedgpeth penned an article entitled “Three words in the Declaration of Independence paint a cruel picture of Natives.” However, while Hedgpeth was eager to remind everyone this meant the Declaration’s “ideals were not extended to everyone,” the historical context she provided for the “merciless Indian savages” passage was quite thin. Hedgpeth, whose bio refers to her as “a Native American journalist” who has “covered topics including Native Americans and their history," begins by setting up the story of “McKaylin Peters, a 24-year-old Native American graduate student at Johns Hopkins University, still recalls when she first heard the words ‘merciless Indian savages.’”  She then adds,  “She cringed when the teacher read a passage deep in the Declaration of Independence: ‘He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.’” Ahead of America 250, she also claims, “Peters and other Native American scholars and tribal leaders are reflecting on the Founding Fathers’ use of the derogatory description for Indigenous people in 1776. Many note that while the Declaration promises that ‘all men are created equal,’ its ideals were not extended to everyone.” Hedgpeth also claimed, “The document’s portrayal of Indigenous people helped establish a moral and legal framework that justified decades of devastating U.S. policies toward Native communities, according to historians.” She also quoted Peters as saying, “It’s a reminder that this country was built by declaring us less than human. When the Declaration of Independence calls us that, it’s a message that Native youth sadly still hear today in classrooms, policy debates and in how society talks about us.” Eventually, Hedgpeth got to some historical context. The first interesting tidbit she provided undermined her central argument, although she didn’t appear to realize it, “[Thomas] Jefferson described Indigenous people as just, honorable and noble — a sharp contrast to the widespread European belief that Indigenous people were inferior.” So, where did this idea come from? While the common image of 18th century warfare is two armies standing in a field about a hundred yards apart and firing at each other, frontier warfare was something entirely different: Repeated violence between Indigenous people and settlers also helped shape the ideology behind the description, including the French and Indian War and Dunmore’s War in 1774, when Virginia colonists fought the Shawnee and Mingo to expand into the Ohio Valley, according to historians. In the summer of 1776, as the Declaration was drafted and adopted, a lesser-known conflict unfolded when Cherokee warriors attacked frontier settlements across parts of Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia. Colonists responded by burning more than 50 Cherokee towns and driving Native people from their homes. By 1776, the Founding Fathers ‘understood their need to accuse the king of what they considered the ultimate crime — partnering with Indigenous peoples and arming them,’ said Ned Blackhawk, a Native American author and Yale University historian. ‘So they created this vilification in the Declaration that, in many ways, was at odds with their experience of living alongside Natives for generations.’ Jefferson’s praise for the natives is not inconsistent with the grievance against the crown. Frontier warfare did not begin in 1774 or even the French Indian and War. Contrary to Blackhawk’s assertion, for several decades, the reality of frontier warfare with the French and their native allies saw the destruction of villages as the Declaration passage in question says. Surely, one can understand why the colonists would be angry at the king for now allying himself with such tribes. It was a trend that would continue during the Revolutionary War. Hedgpeth closed out her article by quoting Center for Native American Youth at the Aspen Institute, Tracy L. Canard Goodluck. Underneath a picture of her wearing a shirt that said ‘“Merciless Indian Savages’ – Declaration of Independence’ she wrote:  ‘Those words served the purpose back then as a way to dehumanize Native people in this country,’ said Goodluck. ‘We need to change that narrative. We’re still here. We’re doctors, lawyers, teachers and political leaders.  ‘I am that merciless Indian savage who my ancestors prayed for to do great things.’ Goodluck is not “that merciless Indian savage.” She may think she is turning the table on Jefferson and the country, but she is not. They say war is hell, but frontier warfare was another level of hell. You cannot understand Jefferson’s writing without the historical knowledge of the reality of frontier warfare up through 1776. If the Washington Post wants to teach nuanced and complicated history then that should extend both ways. July 4th, 2026 10:30 AM Alex Christy 295825 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/clay-waters/2026/07/04/pbss-gross-response-rep-keans-depression-maybe-now-youll-vote Gross political opportunism, poorly disguised as caring for a colleague. Rep. Andy Kim (D-NJ) took to X to hound his New Jersey colleague, GOP Rep. Tom Kean, after his return to work after being hospitalized for depression: "I believe every person should have access to mental health support, including paid time off and sick leave. Congressman Kean has opposed these very benefits for all workers that Members of Congress get. It’s time for that to change." Kim’s mean-spirited partisan hackery was at least expected. Less defensible was PBS News Hour’s “journalism” Tuesday. Reporter Lisa Desjardins: Our Kyle Midura caught up with the congressman today to ask about his pledge of transparency. Producer Kyle Midura: Does this experience changed how you think about access to health care, mental health services more generally? When you committed to full transparency, was the extent of that always going to be one floor speech? Are you going to open up at some point, take questions? PBS producer Kyle Midura hassles Rep. Kean, recently hospitalized for depression: "Has this experience changed how you think about access to health care, mental health services more generally?" pic.twitter.com/r1craxT46u — Clay Waters 🇮🇱 (@claywaters44) July 2, 2026 The News Hour’s weekly political email newsletter joined in the pathetic pile-on, weaponizing Kean’s depression against his voting record, apparently his opposition to legislation to provide sick leave and family leave. Liberals have a nasty personal habit of gloating over the death or suffering of political opponents who supposedly turn out to be victims of the GOP’s own principles or votes (see the ghouls tying the Charlie Kirk assassination to Kirk’s support for gun rights). The email hit came from digital senior editor Joshua Barajas (who in a 2024 newsletter used emotional blackmail to push surgical transing of teenagers: “Donald Trump and JD Vance, have pushed anti-trans rhetoric to extremes on the campaign trail”). Absent for nearly four months, questions around Kean’s unspecified medical condition had swirled in recent weeks, as voters in his state chose midterm candidates and Kean missed vote after vote in Congress. He last voted in early March. Kean said Tuesday that a hospital visit months ago led to him being diagnosed with depression and, under doctors’ recommendations, he remained at the hospital for treatment. Kean said he thought he could “simply push through” and quickly return to his duties, his family, constituents and Congress, but that he decided to abide by doctors’ orders. “There is no timeline for healing. There is no timeline for recovery. Only the work of getting better, one day at a time,” he said. Barajas referenced Midura’s nasty ambush. Kean did not answer questions from PBS News producer Kyle Midura as he left the chamber, including whether the lawmaker would talk more about his experience or whether he has changed his thinking around access to mental health services. A transcript is available, click “Expand.” PBS News Hour 6/30/26 7:43:40 p.m. (ET) Geoff Bennett: Well, after months of speculation, the mystery surrounding a New Jersey congressman's absence is finally over. This morning, Republican Tom Kean Jr. addressed the House, saying he owed his constituents, his colleagues, and the American people an explanation. Rep. Tom Kean (R-NJ): I was given the diagnosis of depression. Now, when people hear the word depression, many people think it simply means feeling sad. But depression is so much more than that. It is physical. It is emotional. And until you experience it yourself, it is difficult to fully understand how powerful this illness can be. Geoff Bennett: That's as other drama unfolded in the House as well. The chamber ground to a complete halt over an internal Republican divide. Our Lisa Desjardins here to explain. She was in the chamber today, including for the congressman's speech. So what more did Congressman Kean have to say, Lisa? Lisa Desjardins: It was a short speech, but he also addressed this question of why he waited so long to talk about this. He said that at first, when he went to a doctor, he was surprised that the doctor recommended that he be hospitalized. Then, after he was hospitalized, he thought he would only be there for weeks. Obviously, it lasted much longer. Now, Kean has been gone or was gone for almost four months, though, Geoff. So, in contrast, in terms of handling this, Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania also was hospitalized for depression back in 2023. He publicly disclosed that the next day after he was hospitalized. So there are still questions about why exactly he waited so long to explain this. Our Kyle Midura caught up with the congressman today to ask about his pledge of transparency. Kyle Midura: Does this experience changed how you think about access to health care, mental health services more generally? When you committed to full transparency, was the extent of that always going to be one floor speech? Are you going to open up at some point take questions? Lisa Desjardins: Now, Kean rarely talks with reporters, and, as you see there, he did not answer any questions, so it's not really clear if he is going to say more about this. Geoff Bennett: And how is this being received on the Hill? Lisa Desjardins: Right. It's amazing. I talked to Democrats and Republicans about this, more than a dozen, and overall they have sympathy for him. They're glad he's back. They're glad that he says that he's recovering. But there is this idea that perhaps members are not paying enough attention to their own personal health and to each other. There is some consternation over how long he was gone and the lack of explanation. As for his own personal political future, he insists he is fully committed to running for reelection, but his district, Geoff, is one that Democrats are targeting. They would like to flip it. I don't think they will target his diagnosis, but his lack of explanation could be a target. July 4th, 2026 6:37 AM Clay Waters 295836 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/brad-wilmouth/2026/07/04/ms-now-legal-analyst-lisa-rubin-sees-hate-justice-thomass On Tuesday afternoon's On the Line show, during a discussion of the Supreme Court decision upholding bans on transgender participation in women's sports, MS NOW legal analyst Lisa Rubin claimed that Justice Clarence Thomas's concurring opinion is "not talking about science," and it  "speaks of hate, not of jurisprudence." MS NOW host Alicia Menendez put on the leftist spin by declaring that the decision is a "major blow to transgender rights." She soon went to MS NOW contributor Kimberly Atkins Stohr, who asserted: "There is ample evidence that transgender girls and women playing sports pose not -- neither a competitive nor a physical risk to cisgender athletes, which is basically the basis upon which Justice Brett Kavanaugh based much of his decision." MS NOW Sees 'Hate' in Clarence Thomas Comments on Males in Women's Sports pic.twitter.com/wB5WlYjcIK — Brad Wilmouth (@bradwilmouth) June 30, 2026 She soon complained about "fearmongering" by conservatives: ... trans women who are receiving hormone therapy are either the same or sometimes at a lower level of -- of endurance, ability, strength, jump height, all the measures of sports that they're not putting anyone in danger competitively or physically. Yet these are the talking points that conservatives have been using and have found to be politically useful in fearmongering against trans people. And now the court has sort of embraced that rationale absent evidence. That's the part that is really troubling for me. Toward the end of the segment, Menendez brought up Justice Thomas's words: Lisa, you wanted to talk about Clarence Thomas's concurring opinion. I want to read you just a little bit from it, and then you'll unpack for me why it matters. He argued, quote, "A man does not have to be -- does not have a legal right to compete against women just because he believes that he is a woman," and, quote, "men and boys with gender dysphoria are not women or girls, even if they believe they are." This goes beyond the legal scope of the case. These are like right-wing talking points that are showing up in his concurrence. Rubin soon complained: He's not talking about science. He's citing sort of like philosophical articles for the proposition that sex is immutable, that it's binary that man, woman, boy, and girl are terms that correspond to adults and children of each sex. And here I'm quoting from his concurrence, to use language to obscure reality, to show, quote, "indifference regarding the truth is to lie to the public and cease to treat our fellow citizens as equals." She then argued that the other majority members were trying to distance themselves from Justice Thomas's choice of words, and concluded by claiming that his argument was based on "hate." Here's Rubin: Now, I was wondering earlier today when I read the majority opinion, it goes out of its way to say that people on both sides of this issue are worthy of respect, whether they identify as trans women or as cisgender, biologically born females. "Everybody who wants a space on that playing field is worthy of respect." And that stuck out to me because that's not something we've heard this court say this week about other disfavored litigants. And I wondered: Why did Justice Kavanaugh include that? That's why. Because that statement and Justice Thomas's concurrence is one that even the justices in the majority want nothing to do with because it speaks of hate, not of jurisprudence. Transcript follows: MS NOW's On the Line June 30, 2026 1:38 p.m. Eastern ALICIA MENENDEZ: This morning, the Supreme Court delivered a major blow to transgender rights. In a 6-3 ruling, the court sided with Idaho and West Virginia, upholding their bans on trans athletes and women's and girls sports, with Justice Brett Kavanaugh writing that, quote, "schools may determine eligibility for women's and girls sports based on biological sex." (...) KIMBERLY ATKINS STOHR, MS NOW POLITICAL ANALYST: There is ample evidence that transgender girls and women playing sports pose not -- neither a competitive nor a physical risk to cisgender athletes, which is basically the basis upon which Justice Brett Kavanaugh based much of his decision. In fact, it shows evidence -- the growing amount of evidence, because still there are still studies going on, and we're still figuring this out, as Sotomayor points out. But that points that trans women who are receiving hormone therapy are either the same or sometimes at a lower level of -- of endurance, ability, strength, jump height, all the measures of sports that they're not putting anyone in danger competitively or physically. Yet these are the talking points that conservatives have been using and have found to be politically useful in fearmongering against trans people. And now the court has sort of embraced that rationale absent evidence. That's the part that is really troubling for me. (...) MENENDEZ: Lisa, you wanted to talk about Clarence Thomas's concurring opinion. I want to read you just a little bit from it, and then you'll unpack for me why it matters. He argued, quote, "A man does not have to be -- does not have a legal right to compete against women just because he believes that he is a woman," and, quote, "men and boys with gender dysphoria are not women or girls, even if they believe they are." This goes beyond the legal scope of the case. These are like right-wing talking points that are showing up in his concurrence. RUBIN: And it doesn't even embrace the science. I mean, both sides here had scientific experts -- one for the plaintiffs essentially saying that trans athletes who take puberty blockers are no differently situated than cisgender women. The folks who are defending the statutes that were anti-trans athletes said, "No, actually, there is a biological difference between the two that has nothing to do with circulating testosterone, and it is like an immutable physical difference between the two, regardless of what side you take on that." That's not what Clarence Thomas is citing. He's not talking about science. He's citing sort of like philosophical articles for the proposition that sex is immutable, that it's binary that man, woman, boy, and girl are terms that correspond to adults and children of each sex. And here I'm quoting from his concurrence, to use language to obscure reality, to show, quote, "indifference regarding the truth is to lie to the public and cease to treat our fellow citizens as equals." Now, I was wondering earlier today when I read the majority opinion, it goes out of its way to say that people on both sides of this issue are worthy of respect, whether they identify as trans women or as cisgender, biologically born females. "Everybody who wants a space on that playing field is worthy of respect." And that stuck out to me because that's not something we've heard this court say this week about other disfavored litigants. And I wondered: Why did Justice Kavanaugh include that? That's why. Because that statement and Justice Thomas's concurrence is one that even the justices in the majority want nothing to do with because it speaks of hate, not of jurisprudence. July 4th, 2026 5:56 AM Brad Wilmouth 295800 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tim-graham/2026/07/03/liberal-news-site-mocks-how-gop-reboots-red-scare-over-dsa-primary Brett T. at Twitchy chronicled how the tweeters mocked the liberals at Axios for warning: “GOP reboots the Red Scare as young Democrats embrace socialism.” They don't want to spend any time identifying the actual communist sympathies displayed by the Democratic Socialists of America candidates winning primaries.  The use of the term “Red Scare” always implied falsehood, that there were no actual communists to be exposed. Warning about the dangers of the Soviet Union was for kooks, and so was worry about communist spies in the United States (they were real). Today, you're supposed to ignore communists winning seats in Congress, as in CNN gumshoe Andrew Kaczynski's report that incoming congresswoman Darializa Avila Chevalier was tweeting communist content in 2020: Archived posts and retweets during this timeframe included a recommendation that Karl Marx’s Capital was an “essential must-read,” a complaint that public libraries did not carry enough Marxist literature by Lenin and other revolutionary writers, and a retweet from a Communist-identifying account lamenting that bookstore “banned books” displays did not include The Complete Works of J. V. Stalin. Graham Platner identified as a communist in a 2020 Reddit post, but he gets a syrupy cover story in Time magazine, must like Zohran Mamdani did. But who needs to present evidence? Axios implied communism's on the ash heap of history (so pay no attention to say, China or Cuba or North Korea): 70 years after the Red Scare and 35 years after the fall of the Soviet Union, President Trump and Republicans are trying to re-introduce a national fear of "godless communists" ahead of the critical midterms. Why it matters: A wave of resounding victories by Democratic Socialists has the GOP trotting out a message that last worked when most of those candidates weren't even born. It's too soon to know if the message is working — but Trump and Republican strategists see an opening with voters old enough to remember Soviet-era nuclear drills and spy dramas. So the right-wingers are still channeling Tom Clancy novels, those crazy kooks. Then came the "reality check"!  Reality check: Democratic socialism is not communism. New York's Zohran Mamdani and Washington, D.C., mayoral candidate Janeese Lewis George both call for expanded government programs, Axios' Josephine Walker writes. "Any attempt to smear us as 'extremists' falls flat when so many Americans are struggling with the rising cost of housing, homelessness, unaffordable healthcare, and underfunded schools," a DSA spokesperson told Axios in a statement. Mamdani spoke of "seizing the means of production," which certainly sounds like Karl Marx copy. Axios presented DSA statements as "news" like helpful press aides.  PS: Axios also wants you to believe that establishment Democrats are "centrists," not liberals, with this piece: House Dem centrists plot Mamdani Caucus counterattack Moderate House Democrats are warning they're prepared for "war" if incoming progressives and democratic socialists try to hijack the House floor to secure ideological concessions. July 3rd, 2026 10:49 PM Tim Graham 295841 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/pj-gladnick/2026/07/03/atlantic-magazine-panics-over-communists-taking-control-democrat Commies are taking over the Democrat party! You might think that was a charge leveled by some rightwing reactionary who somehow confused socialism with communism. Instead it was the morbid fear expressed by longtime liberal Jonathan Chait in Wednesday's Atlantic magazine, "There’s Nothing Democratic About These Socialists." So panicked was Chait at the specter of communism taking over his beloved Democrat party that he did not just mention it in passing. In fact, the C-word was invoked eleven times in Chait's article in which he accuses the Democratic Socialists of America of being the parasitic pathway for injecting communism into its host party. The writer and activist Michael Harrington helped found the DSA in 1982. His goal was to build a socialist movement that would eventually pull the Democratic Party toward more humane domestic and foreign policies. He believed that a commitment to freedom of speech, elections, and other democratic norms was an absolute requirement for any socialist organization. And generations of bitter experience taught Harrington and his allies that socialist organizations had failed because they allowed communists to infiltrate them and take control of their organizing structures. Its founding bylaws accordingly permitted the expulsion of members who were “under the discipline of any self-defined democratic-centralist organization,” a slightly jargonish way of describing communists. So how did that attempt to somehow keep communism out of a socialist party work out? Not well as could have been expected. The communist influx threw open the question of whether the DSA would support authoritarian parties and states around the world. Communist organizers, as Harrington feared, began to reshape the DSA as an ally of any anti-Western force, even the most murderous and oppressive. After Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, the DSA opposed the invasion but blamed it on “the expansion of NATO and the aggressive approach of Western nations,” and opposed any military aid to allow Ukraine to defend itself. Militant anti-Zionism became a wedge that the group’s more radical activists used to drive away critics of authoritarianism on the left. In 2025, the group’s convention voted to officially remove its founding language allowing for the expulsion of members who worked for communist cells, and added a provision calling the Palestinian “right to resistance” a central tenet of the DSA. Having dismantled the guardrails that Harrington built to exclude communists, the group established new guardrails to exclude anybody opposed to Israel’s destruction. “Michael Harrington’s DSA is dead,” a dispatch from the proceedings gloated. ...The DSA’s Red Star caucus was formed the year after the North Star caucus, in an apparent rebuke. It writes that nearly half of the members of the National Political Committee, the DSA’s highest leadership body, “openly identify as communists.” Almost half of the DSA's leadership are "openly" communist so that should make that leadership mostly communist when you factor in the secret communists. And now that party with its mostly communist leadership is in the process of taking over the Democrat party: ...During the New Deal era, Stalinist organizers pitched themselves as “liberals in a hurry.” The Progressive Party, which ran Henry Wallace for president in 1948, was secretly run by Communist Party loyalists, but it appealed to standard liberals by touting themes such as civil rights, economic justice, and an end to the Cold War. The DSA employs a similar formula, drawing voters in by denouncing oligarchy and genocide and promising to expand health insurance. Chevalier’s campaign, like those of other DSA candidates, has focused on affordability, fighting corporate greed, and similar progressive themes. When she was asked by MS NOW if she is a communist, she replied, “I’m not. I’m a democratic socialist,” and called questions about her adherence to totalitarian ideologies “a distraction.” ...The DSA’s long-term strategy is to exploit the Democratic Party’s ballot access and reservoir of voters to build its following, and then, after it gains enough power, break off to form its own party, after which the husk of the old Democratic Party would wither and die. This gambit is called the “dirty break,” a term coined by a 2017 article in the left-wing magazine Jacobin. A bit of faulty logic on the part of Chait here. Why would the commies who take over the Democrat party need to "break off to form its own party" if they already control the Democrats as we now see happening with little pushback from the current Democrat leaders? Finally, almost by TDS muscle memory force of habit, Chait makes sure to take the obligatory shot at Orange Man Bad by absurdly associating communists with MAGA: "Democrats are likely to face the same kind of pressure that Republicans confronted with MAGA’s hostile takeover: first to ignore their allies’ sinister goals, and then to rationalize and eventually justify them." July 3rd, 2026 9:54 PM P.J. Gladnick 295833 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/nicholas-fondacaro/2026/07/03/view-celebrates-america-250-fireworks-show-hate-country While Americans were coming together to celebrate the country’s 250th birthday, warmly welcoming the many nations of the World Cup into our home, and cheering on America’s team from living rooms, bars, and stadiums across the country, the miserable crones of ABC’s The View were trying to divide and spread hatred. Here’s examples of how they hated on America in 2026. When America toppled Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro in a one-night raid, they couldn’t admit it was a good thing. Co-host Joy Behar clutched her pearls that America would have the nerve to take out a dictator and then whined about America’s military might and that it was directed at a smaller, weaker nation: Here’s what I don't understand. I may not be up on all of this stuff because I have a life. But, okay, Maduro is a bad guy. We took him out. So is Kim Jong-un, so is Putin, so is -- what's that other guy in Hungary? And we're going to go into all these countries and just kidnap the leaders?! (...) Its always somebody who is weaker than we are! It's always a country that we can overpower! It's not China. It's not Russia. It's not North Korea. Sorry Joy, but every country is weaker than we are. America’s unhealthcare system is unmatched.   Behar admits she doesn't actually follow the news and topics she has to talk about because "I have a life." Then falsely claims Maduro was "kidnap[ped]." pic.twitter.com/NOOFE6HOBp — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) January 6, 2026   Amid the war with Iran, not-so Sunny Hostin ridiculously parroted anti-American Soviet propaganda suggesting that the United States was the greatest nuclear threat in the world.  “I think we can also agree that this country is the only country that has ever used a nuclear weapon! This country! This country!” she shouted when guest co-host and CNBC anchor Sara Eisen stated the fact that the world would be better with Islamic regime of Iran in it. It also sounded similar to when she and moderator Whoopi Goldberg claimed last year that being black in America was worse than living in Iran.   The View's Sunny Hostin suggests America is worse and more of a threat to the world than Iran because the U.S. nuked Japan 80 years ago (if that's not her intent, then why even bring it up?): HAINES: Because we view, as Americans, our lives are different, they matter now.… pic.twitter.com/PB7yOjYyky — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) March 20, 2026   Their anti-Americanism really skyrocketed in June as the Fourth of July quickly approached. In two different episodes, Behar and Hostin insisted that Americans should be embarrassed of their country. According to Hostin, not only was America an embarrassment, it was also a “failed experiment”: HOSTIN: And at this point, I am embarrassed at our government. I'm embarrassed at our lack of healthcare. I'm embarrassed on the assault on the press. I'm embarrassed of our Congress. I'm embarrassed by the criminal felon president that is in the Oval Office that has a UFC cage on the White House lawn. (...) HOSTIN: I'm embarrassed about all those things. And I'm also embarrassed at how America is now seen across the globe. I don't think that many Americans understand that we are part of a wonderful global community. And when you look at our allies, our allies are now giving us a one-star rating as a country. While I am conflicted about this country because I feel that it is at this point a failed experiment, quite frankly.    Sunny Hostin, who once said she was more comfortable in Ghana than America, says she's "embarrassed" by the country as America nears 250 and calls it a "failed experiment" in self governance: SUNNY HOSTIN: And so I think we have a very complicated history here. I think it's a… pic.twitter.com/gILwK0E8y8 — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) June 5, 2026   As a counter to President Trump’s recent speech praising America on the National Mall ahead of America’s 250th birthday, Behar tapped a soundbite of comedian Larry David’s hatred of America because of the UFC event at the White House. And Behar agreed: DAVID: It was a travesty, yeah. What else can you say about it? It was embarrassing. I was embarrassed to be an American, yeah. [Cuts back to live] [Applause] BEHAR: So, I have -- I'm very good friends with Larry David, and so I'm not going to -- I think he's right in many ways. I mean, you listen to Trump. We have -- we used to have friends around the world. Now we don't have them anymore.   The View decries celebrating America's 250th birthday. Joy Behar agrees with Larry David that it's 'embarrassing' to be an American pic.twitter.com/PUAzTFUI6J — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) June 26, 2026   Behar went on to declare that “we should all be” "embarrassed" to be Americans. In another part of Hostin’s comments, she said she’s “discouraged by how this country is viewed by the rest of the world.” Well, given how the World Cup tourists have been embracing American culture and having a blast in the various cities across the country, you’re full of it, Sunny. And here’s my evidence:   This fills me with pride as an American. pic.twitter.com/7y2iLfgBml — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) July 2, 2026 July 3rd, 2026 3:36 PM Nicholas Fondacaro 295834 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/curtis-houck/2026/07/03/wow-cbs-mornings-gives-glowing-profile-christian-music-star If CBS News wants to be a news organization that represents all Americans, profiles such as one that closed Tuesday’s CBS Mornings with chief legal and national correspondent Jan Crawford being given nearly five minutes to air a profile of Christian music star Brandon Lake with unapologetic mentions of God and His Son, Jesus Christ. Featured co-host Vladimir Duthiers gave it top billing in two teases, informing viewers that “Brandon Lake is one of the biggest stars in faith-based music” and he’s “the mega popular artist who’s redefining Christian music.” Later, here was how Duthiers cued up Crawford’s piece following a soundbite from a performance of his new hit, The Author.  WATCH: Before the final day of Supreme Court opinions, Tuesday's 'CBS Mornings' ended with an incredible profile by the great @JanCBS Crawford of Christian music sensation @BrandonLake. God and Jesus proclaimed on national TV in a positive light -- something we need more of! pic.twitter.com/6Qr2E4HBHE — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) July 2, 2026 Notice how it was both straightforward and didn’t seek to sugarcoat or tear down Christianity: That is Brandon Lake’s song The Author from his new live concert album, King of Hearts in the Room. Lake is one of the biggest names in Christian music. The six-time Grammy winner has collaborated with artists like Jelly Roll and Lainey Wilson. Jan Crawford caught up with him on tour in San Antonio. She learned how a preacher’s kid is finding new fans. The piece started with Lake saying his career “isn’t just about entertainment,” but “an encounter” where “people’s lives are changed” and “walking out better than they came in.” Crawford finally came in, asking: “Would you say that music is, in a way, your ministry?” “I feel like music is what God has called me to, the gift that He’s given me, and that’s how I’m able to share this message and reach people,” Lake replied. With a clip of Lake singing another hit King of Hearts, Crawford said Lake’s “message of hope and redemption and praise...is helping redefine Christian music” through “more than four billion streams and sold-out arenas for shows he calls a joy bomb, bringing people of all ages and ethnicities closer to Jesus.” Lake praised his parents (including his father, a pastor) for having “made [singing] fun, and I think what church is supposed to really be about, and that’s community and sharing in everything that you have.” Following discussion of how Lake went as far as having last names tattooed on a thigh to fund his first record a decade ago, Crawford shared Lake was mentally struggling in his initial waves of success before realizing he “leaned on God, and his friends, and family” (click “expand”): CRAWFORD: The hits on Billboard’s Hot Christian Song Chart came quick, six number one songs. [LAKE SINGING GRAVES INTO GARDENS] CRAWFORD: But as his career was skyrocketing, Lake found himself mentally at the bottom. LAKE: When I didn’t have the next song write, invite, or I didn’t have the next song I was excited about, or the next show, I started to panic, but I was too prideful to tell my wife what I was experiencing. So, I was having some weird thoughts, dark thoughts, like this is not who I am, and I’m on the mountain top right now, my dreams are coming true, and it’s just crazy. I guess, I’d say a lot of people’s lowest moments come from a low moment, and mine came from a high moment. [LAKE SINGING HELP!] CRAWFORD: He says he leaned on God and friends and family, finding balance on his farm in South Carolina with his wife and three sons[.] Crawford added that “he saw how everyone struggles, and you can see that compassion in his music, and his community is continuing to grow” with many of his “high moments involve collaborations” with names such as Cody Johnson, Jelly Roll, and Lainey Wilson. Questioned why he’s expanded his music to include more duets, Lake aptly said that while “the songs are cool,” the real message is “God loves collabs” when His people come together. Johnson spared a moment to tell Crawford that, from his perspective, Lake’s career has “not only help[ed] shape people’s lives,” but collaborations with country music stars have “help[ed] him kind of segue into the country music realm.” Speaking of segues, this went into Crawford’s final question to Lake about what he would like his music to mean to non-Believers (click “expand”): CRAWFORD [TO LAKE]: There are people out there that they would never consider them religious or even believers. LAKE: Right. CRAWFORD: Like, what would you say your music offers them? LAKE: The best thing I can do is offer my story, what God has done in my life, and allow God to do the rest. Like I’m not out here trying to, like, you know, beat people with a Bible, and you know, fire and brimstone. Like, I don’t think that’s effective. I think my songs are offerings, and they’re open doors. [LAKE SINGING THAT’S WHO I PRAISE] Back live, Duthiers remarked he “love[d] the fact that you know he says that his music is an open door to everybody” and “being honest” while co-host Nate Burleson said it was “beautiful” in sharing “that everybody struggles.” Filling in as co-host, Inside Edition’s Eva Pilgrim concurred that he would be so “honest” that “at the height [of his career], he didn’t feel great.” Along with an increased focus on stories such as welfare fraud and having balance in segments such as one Duthiers had Thursday with Gen Zers, CBS now has more than a few examples to build a roadmap to an outlet that respects all Americans. To see the relevant CBS transcript from June 30, click here. July 3rd, 2026 1:38 PM Curtis Houck 295835 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/clay-waters/2026/07/03/ny-times-still-trying-turn-right-wing-texas-blue-latest-dem-hope The New York Times engaged in coverage of its own favorable poll for the Democratic candidate for a U.S. Senate race in Texas that was eyebrow-raising in its detail and intensity: “Times/Siena Poll Finds Talarico and Paxton Tied in Texas Senate Race.” The ins and outs of the numbers were lovingly detailed by Shane Goldmacher, national political correspondent, along with polling editor Ruth Igielnik and Camille Baker. The Democratic Party has a serious chance to win a Senate seat in Texas for the first time in a generation, as James Talarico, a Democratic state legislator, begins the summer locked in a tied race with Ken Paxton, the Republican state attorney general weighed down by past scandals, according to a New York Times/Siena poll. Frustrations over President Trump’s handling of the economy and concerns about Mr. Paxton’s character have put the Senate seat in play in one of the nation’s Republican strongholds. Mr. Paxton, 63, swept past indictment, impeachment and allegations of infidelity to thump an incumbent Republican senator who vastly outspent him in a primary this year. Now, as he faces Mr. Talarico, a 37-year-old who is training to be a minister, Mr. Paxton finds himself in a tight race that is marked by striking demographic divides. Overall, Mr. Talarico and Mr. Paxton each garnered 47 percent of the vote in the poll. There were several signs of weakness for Mr. Paxton in the poll. This story had several signs of the paper’s “weakness” in the knees for anyone challenging what the Times considers the dangerously extreme ultra-conservatives who run Texas (no Democrat has won a statewide race since 1994, though that never stopped the paper from pumping up various failed Democratic candidates). Some Times headlines from 2021 alone demonstrate the labeling bias: “Emboldened Republicans at the Helm, Texas Steers Hard Right” “For Texas Governor, Hard Right Turn Followed a Careful Rise” “Texas Lawmakers, After Shift To Right, Plan More of Same” “Can Texas Turn Further Right? Top 2 Republicans Say It Can” “Texas Governor Pushes State Further to the Right On Voting Rights and Race” As for Democratic hopes for overthrowing this right-wing establishment, Exhibit A was the apparently charming former congressman Beto O’Rourke, who lost to Republican Sen. Ted Cruz in 2020 but retained the paper’s enthusiastic support and glowing coverage when he challenged (and again lost) the gubernatorial race to Republican Gov. Greg Abbott in 2022. Back to the poll: Still, the poll shows the extent of the challenge ahead of Mr. Talarico. His enormous lead among independent voters — 27 percentage points — was only good enough to force the race into a virtual tie in heavily Republican Texas. While Mr. Talarico is ahead in Texas’s big urban centers, Mr. Paxton is crushing him two-to-one everywhere else. Melissa Daniels, 34, identifies as politically independent and is supporting Mr. Talarico. “I think he’s focusing on the common issues that the people have,” she said. “We want to feel safe. We want to be able to afford groceries, and, you know, those issues that we care about.” Ms. Daniels, an attorney living in Arlington, drew a contrast with Mr. Paxton’s priorities. “Paxton’s focused on, you know, I.V.F. and who’s using what bathroom,” she said. “Just stuff that isn’t really affecting day to day lives of Americans.” The sheer closeness of the race is an ominous sign for Republicans, who have not lost a statewide contest in Texas since the 1990s. Talarico’s nutty Biblical interpretations were briefly, gently sketched. Republicans have aggressively circulated clips of Mr. Talarico’s more left-wing commentary, including his provocative suggestions that “God is nonbinary” or that there are six biological sexes, and tagged him “TalaFreako.” But the surveys show the extremist frame has yet to take root with most voters. Still, more voters saw Mr. Paxton as “too extreme” (50 percent) than Mr. Talarico (43 percent). July 3rd, 2026 1:18 PM Clay Waters 295803 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/mark-finkelstein/2026/07/03/250-morning-joes-haass-warns-americas-democracy-may-not The end is nigh! Longtime Morning Joe regular Richard Haass has traditionally been one of the show's more measured voices. But, along with others [looking at you, Willie Geist], his tone has, in recent times, become more strident. On Thursday's show, Haass "celebrated" our country's 250th by telling people they shouldn't be hopeful—"sanguine," as he put it—about its future. Claiming that our democracy "is not in great shape," Haass warned that we might not have a democracy left to celebrate in only five or ten years. Yikes! Haass left no doubt as to the culprit, the president:  Checks and balances are not working in any way like James Madison set out in the Federalist Papers. You have the abuse of the pardon power. We've been talking about the, the corruption and the lack of accountability of people in office. We have a president going to war without the, involvement of the American people or the Congress, talking about rigged elections. You know, it's a long list.  About "the abuse of the pardon power" -- you mean, like the last guy, who swore he wouldn't pardon his son -- but did? Just days before the nation marks a milestone that should inspire pride, Morning Joe chose somber catastrophizing — with unsubtle finger-pointing at President Trump.   Yikes! At 250, @Morning_Joe’s Haass Warns: America’s Democracy May Not Survive Next 5-10 Years! pic.twitter.com/Sxjm0Ceid2 — Mark Finkelstein (@markfinkelstein) July 2, 2026 On the cusp of America’s 250th, Haass — and by extension the Morning Joe panel — insist Americans should temper any celebratory spirit with anxiety over the republic’s possible near-term collapse. Question for Haass: You predict American democracy could end in as little as five years. Trump will be long gone from the White House by then. So, who amongst the leading presidential contenders do you see declaring martial law, canceling elections, and declaring herself President for Life? Here's the transcript. MS NOW Morning Joe 7/2/26 7:06 am EDT WILLIE GEIST: So Richard, we are two days away from the Fourth of July and the official 250th birthday of the United States of America, all the celebration that will come with it across the country.  I'm curious, just given your long understanding, and experience with history across several presidents, about where you feel we are right now on this 250th birthday? RICHARD HAASS: Well, look, the great news is, we made it. Democracy is tough. We're the world's oldest democracy, so that's an impressive accomplishment. I think the Founders would have been pleasantly surprised if they had been told, 250 years later we'd be celebrating. But the honest news is, our democracy is not in great shape. Coming back now, we remember the president talking about 401k's, Willie. Well, if they were a measure of American democracy, it would have suffered a significant correction over, over recent years. Checks and balances are not working in any way like James Madison set out in the Federalist Papers. You have the abuse of the pardon power. We've been talking about the, the corruption and the lack of accountability of people in office. We have a president going to war without the, involvement of the American people or the Congress, talking about rigged elections. You know, it's a long list.  So I think, and the lesson we all ought to take from this, is not to be sanguine. So yeah, we can celebrate the 250th, but it's got to be a really sober celebration.  We've got to think, what do we do to make sure we still have a democracy to celebrate, not just in another 250 years—how about in five years or, or ten years?  What do we have to do to strengthen the resilience? Cause we've learned that democracy is, is not guaranteed. That so much depends upon the character of the people in government, whether it's the president or those in Congress. And I would just say we have a, a shortage of that these days. So American democracy is vulnerable. So I actually think we need to have a serious conversation about what do we need to do to, to strengthen it. July 3rd, 2026 9:45 AM Mark Finkelstein 295828 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/nicholas-spinnato/2026/07/03/dead-arrival-cnn-morning-spreads-doom-vibes-250th On Thursday’s CNN This Morning before the Fourth of July celebration for the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence from the British monarch, host Audie Cornish and her panel spread doom on the planed events. She especially took issue with events led by President Trump, like the Great American State Fair on the National Mall.  The panel of former Trump communications director Mike Dubke and Biden aide Meghan Hays joined in bashing on the fair, but both agreed it was a cool concept; it just didn’t meet their standards. Cornish jumped into Dubke and Hays’ back-and-forth and said the fair was “On the list of self-owns” because there was a “bipartisan” organization, America 250, that was created by Congress to hold such events.   On Thursday’s CNN This Morning, Audie Cornish spread doom on DC's 250th events, as she connected the Great American State Fair to the media-favorite reflecting pool. She then asked, “Why do the vibes have to be off on something that should have been politically neutral?” pic.twitter.com/7v5PtCijUz — Nick (@nspin310) July 2, 2026   As for Freedom 250 events, their World Cup watch parties in D.C. have been a success so far, as many celebrated the U.S.’s success in the tournament on the National Mall. Dubke asked this to Cornish and wondered, “Where’s the counter state fair then?” After another back and forth between panelists after Dubke’s question, Hays said the story of Freedom 250, the Trump-created anniversary group, was one of “corruption”: (...) But also this is more about the corruption.  They came in. They had their own organization. People are sponsoring it. More money going to them, and the execution here on something that could have been incredible is just so terrible. There's no one there. There's no food, there's no rides, there's no semblance of a state fair. And it's just really unfortunate because our country, like, everyone deserves better here. Cornish later turned to enjoin the media favorite of the reflecting pool to Independence Day events Cornish began, “Is disappointing that in the nation's capital, what we've got is a green reflecting pool with barbed wire” and stopped as Dubke scoffed, “See, now you're just going to the negatives.” Hays and Cornish then complained about the heat and weather, and as Hays went on about the weather. To which, Cornish joked: “He’s not in charge of the weather. Okay?” Cornish then started to close the anniversary event bashing, as she asked: “And as an immigrant, I love July 4th. I think that everybody feels like, why do the vibes have to be off on something that should have been politically neutral?” Dubke said events in small towns would be great for the celebration, and told people to “leave Washington.” Amid the doom of the DC events, Dubke’s point should be taken to heart for all to enjoy the parts of the underappreciated America, where Cornish’s feelings of bad vibes may not be felt at all. The transcript is below. Click "expand": CNN This Morning July 2, 2026 6:53:22 AM Eastern (...) MIKE DUBKE: Look, this is a great concept. I as a kid, I snuck into the Erie County Fair, which is larger than most state fairs. And this is my shout-out to Western New York again. But state fairs are awesome. I didn't see any rides. I didn't see any animals. AUDIE CORNISH: There was a Ferris wheel. MEGHAN HAYES: The Ferris wheel, like, stopped at one point because the generator broke [Laughter] DUBKE: Where are the animals? HAYES: Where was a rodeo at one point? DUBKE: I mean, this actually really could have been a great -  HAYES: Cool concept- DUBKE: - very cool concept. And unfortunately, it seems like it didn't get brought off in that way. CORNISH: It’s again- DUBKE: No demolition derby? CORNISH: On the list of self-owns, this one is high because there was an organization that was planning 250 events. It was bipartisan. It was approved by Congress. They had been planning. And then the Trump folks came in and said, “No, we have our own group.” And it's been this. DUBKE: But they also got funded. The other group got funded.  CORNISH: Yeah. DUBKE: What is there? What are they? Where's the counter state fair then?  CORNISH: Well, I do- HAYES: Where are they going to have it? DUBKE: When? HAYES: But where are you going to have it?  CORNISH: Yeah HAYES: The park service is run by -  like the president has [inaudible] CORNISH: Say that again: The park service- HAYES: Is run by the president. That's something that the Department of interior. There you have it. So, it's a it's an executive branch function, but also this is more about the corruption.  They came in. They had their own organization. People are sponsoring it. More money going to them, and the execution here on something that could have been incredible is just so terrible. There's no one there. There's no food, there's no rides, there's no semblance of a state fair. And it's just really unfortunate because our country, like, everyone deserves better here. (...) 6:55:01 AM Eastern CORNISH: I think what it is is I - Look positive. You can now see Ludacris. I think one of my producers told me in Ohio, okay, like other places are going to have really great 250 events. My family is going to be up in Plymouth, Massachusetts calls itself America's hometown. There's going to be awesome parades and everything there. DUBKE: I’m very excited about that. CORNISH: Is disappointing that in the nation's capital, what we've got is a green reflecting pool with barbed wire - DUBKE: See, now you're just going to the negatives. CORNISH: The generator out on the ferris wheel. DUBKE: I understand that. CORNISH: That it's hot as heck and there's not even fried butter, as you mentioned. HAYES: And the fireworks are getting pushed back to 11 P.M. because he wants to give a speech for 45 minutes. And the weather is going to be so terrible, you won't be able to see. DUBKE: As anyone who is - CORNISH: He’s not in charge of the weather. Okay. [Laughter] But the point is, it didn't have to be this way. HAYES: That’s right. Right. (...) 6:56:18 AM Eastern CORNISH: I grew up in Boston, like seeing the symphony and the fireworks on the esplanade, I care - I like love July 4th. I can't tell you. And as an immigrant, I love July 4th. I think that everybody feels like, why do the vibes have to be off on something that should have been politically neutral? And now the events that Freedom 250 has made, and I'm saying Freedom 250. DUBKE: I know, you're drawing your line there. CORNISH: I draw a line by congressionally approved versus not. I like that line because it's like my tax dollars and who represents me is, like, it didn't have to be this way. You didn't have to have a moment where Martina McBride, of all people, has to be like, you know what, I'm out. This is too political. DUBKE: But to your larger point, I think once you get outside the beltway, where America is going to be celebrating this in small towns across the country, I mean, if you want a callout, you leave Washington. CORNISH: Yeah. Of course. DUBKE: Don't go through DCA, though, because it will be shut down. CORNISH: [Laughs] Yeah, but the airspace is shut down. (...) July 3rd, 2026 9:32 AM Nicholas Spinnato 295821 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tim-graham/2026/07/03/media-eagerly-take-wrong-side-facts-girls-sports Journalists love to boast that they are “Facts First” people, that they are the brave souls seeking out “truth.” But when it comes to transgenderism, facts go out the window, and truth is triggering. When the Supreme Court upheld state bans on boys in girls’ sports, NBC anchor Craig Melvin sounded apologetic in live coverage.  "The terms that we’re using here during our reporting, biological male, biological female, the high court put those terms in quotations in their decision and their dissent.” They know that referring to boys and girls, those polar opposites, are a highly controversial set of terms. NBC reporter Kelly O’Donnell lamented President Trump “often sort of boils it down into bumper sticker language, talking about transgender athletes... It’s obviously much more complex.” No. It’s not. There are boys, and there are girls. Anyone who can't understand that probably shouldn't be in journalism. They should never assert themselves as “fact checkers.” Another pro-trans trope is to claim the number of “trans athletes” is a “tiny slice” of competing students. But if you’re the girl who loses to a boy at a swim meet or a track meet, it doesn’t matter how “rare” it is. The same goes for girls who have been injured in competitions by stronger male interlopers. On ABC, reporter Devin Dwyer was feeling the pain of “Becky Pepper Jackson,” promoted as “the only known openly transgender student and athlete in the state of West Virginia,” who “bravely brought this case to the Supreme Court, insisting that she had an equal right to play with the girls.” He mourned “it’s certainly a blow to that transgender community and student athletes on this last day of Pride Month.” Dwyer has no sensitivity to girls on the other side of the case. A teammate, Adaelia Cross, claimed in a legal brief that “Becky” sexually harassed her in the locker room with taunts like "Suck my d--k." Speaking of terminology, the two sides of this argument are the “conservatives” or the “conservative states” versus “trans Americans” or the “transgender community.” They can’t label the Left, and there are apparently no “liberal states” in America. Then comes the miasma of terms like “assigned at birth.” Assigned by who? God? Well, the term manglers are implying that God can make mistakes. On CNN, anchor Laura Coates explained, “The argument that they were using to support a ban was that there was an unfair advantage provided to those assigned male at birth in women's competition.” Later, Coates repeated it: “Here was the crux of the issue: It was whether or not somebody who was assigned the male gender at birth would be allowed to play in traditionally so-called girls’ sports.” So reserving a sport for girls is “so-called”? It’s only “so-called girls’ sports” once you mandate putting boys into it. She added that women claiming sex discrimination when boys are allowed in is “at the heart of many culture wars.” When conservatives object to the long, slow, ideological march of the libertine Left, it’s a “culture war.” When the LGBTQ army tramples through the culture imposing its unnatural orthodoxies, that’s somehow not a “culture war.” Their revolution is just an outbreak of “diversity and inclusion.” A New York Times poll question last year (that included the term “athletes who were male at birth”) found 79 percent of Americans oppose boys participating in girls’ sports. That doesn’t stop our crusading media elitists. They think this vast majority is on the “wrong side of history.”  But they’re on the wrong side of facts.  July 3rd, 2026 6:00 AM Tim Graham 295840 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/siena-do/2026/07/03/ms-now-touts-justice-jacksons-moving-birthright-citizenship-opinion As the Supreme Court released their decision to uphold birthright citizenship, the leftist media celebrated President Trump’s defeat, though they still found plenty to complain about. MS NOW’s Lawrence O’Donnell and his guests on Monday’s The Last Word, Professor Laurence Tribe, Professor David Blight, and Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) ripped into the dissenting Justices while misinterpreting American history and… (wait for it)... lavishing praise upon Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. “Can you explain to us why all nine Justices could not read that simple language of birthright citizenship the same way?” O’Donnell asked Tribe, teeing him up to attack the dissenting Justices. “Well, they certainly could read it the same way if they were being honest lawyers without any agenda. . .” Tribe replied. “Four Supreme Court Justices just couldn't seem to read the language or the history the way anybody who has studied this subject outside the context of wanting to please Donald Trump and the revisionists understood it to mean.”   .@Harvard_Law professor Laurence (what kind of spelling is that?) Tribe calls the dissenting Justices of Trump v. Barbara dishonest lawyers: pic.twitter.com/4K3BVQfT9q — Cici Marie (@Cici_Marie_1776) July 1, 2026   In his answer, Blight later told O’Donnell, “Section One of the 14th Amendment is what holds this country together,” and that, “it's like the angel hovering over us that whatever else we do wrong, whatever, you know, missteps we make in the world, we've still got that. It still holds us together as a community, whatever we are, whoever we are, color, religion, anything.”   Birthright citizenship is the only thing holding America together? Miss me with that one, ya old geezer. pic.twitter.com/1H8jvHG7H0 — Cici Marie (@Cici_Marie_1776) July 1, 2026   The two Ivy League professors also expressed their horror that anyone dissented from what they felt was a self-evident principle: TRIBE: What we did not know, what I think very few people predicted, was that on the basic Constitutional issue, this Court would rule 5 to 4. . . it is frightening because it represents the views of all but one of - you know, it's views of four Justices. All it takes is a shift of one.   (...) BLIGHT:  I can't answer for what's exactly in Samuel Alito's head, or Clarence Thomas's or Kavanaugh's, but what they really have is essentially a political and racial ideology. They have a racial vision of this country. They have a political and racial ideology in search of a history that's not there. But they're going to insist on finding one.    They weren't thoughtful or analytical or managed to look into the deeper meaning behind the law... they were just Trump suck-ups pic.twitter.com/nh6WlHaY6w — Cici Marie (@Cici_Marie_1776) July 1, 2026   O’Donnell tried to make the point that anyone who was born in the United States, even those born to American citizens, had birthright citizenship: My great-grandfather moved his family here when my grandfather was about eight years old. And my grandfather then was able to become a citizen. And then his children then had birthright citizenship. And I'm the second generation of birthright citizenship here. And it seems - one just wonders what - how Samuel Alito thinks he got his citizenship in this country.   Unfortunately Lawrence O'Donnell is a citizen of the US (even though he clearly hates the country) not because he was born here but because his parents were American citizens. That should be the only definition of "birthright citizenship" pic.twitter.com/Dp5Hd1fg9t — Cici Marie (@Cici_Marie_1776) July 1, 2026   Justice Alito’s parents were American citizens, and that’s how he got his citizenship, not just because he was born here. The same applies to O’Donnell. When they weren’t ripping on the dissenting Justices, O’Donnell and company were rushing to kneel before Jackson, the woman who can’t define what a woman is. “She's writing opinions that are so pointed, so powerful, that she is not just speaking to the high-minded intellectual legal scholars. She is speaking to the very idea of America,” Senator Booker gushed.   Insufferable: @SenBooker worshipping Ketanji Brown Jackson She only had a "brutal" confirmation hearing because SHE couldn't define what a woman was! pic.twitter.com/wV29X8xAZ7 — Cici Marie (@Cici_Marie_1776) July 1, 2026   “It reads like a historical essay,” Blight referred to Jackson’s opinion. “It is a historical essay, it's deeply researched, she not only quotes from me or quotes Frederick Douglass several times, but six, seven other historians, the best historians of Reconstruction." How humble Blight was to associate himself with Frederick Douglass, and in the same sentence classify himself within the top seven Reconstruction historians of all time.   Real humble, there: Yale professor David Blight places himself up on Frederick Douglass's level and classifies himself within the top 7 Reconstruction historians ever. He also wants Jackson's opinion in a scholarly journal. The Ivy League is now a clown show. pic.twitter.com/BFAtzbR8Oo — Cici Marie (@Cici_Marie_1776) July 1, 2026   In case you doubted that Ivy League schools had completely lost their intellectual prowess, these professors touted Jackson, who used the TikTok phrase “understood the assignment” in the first section of her concurring opinion. Yet, Blight immediately wanted to put that embarrassing document into a scholarly journal: I already emailed the Executive Director of the Organization of American Historians, and I said, 'Is there any way we could put Jackson's opinion in the next issue of the Journal of American History?’ To top off all the delusional ranting, they stuffed in a little court-packing propaganda: TRIBE: We really have to think seriously about reforming the Court when we have the votes to do it, because the Court is now stacked in a direction that is profoundly ahistorical, profoundly anti-Constitutional. BOOKER: We must put term limits on the court. Take people that have been there for more than 18 years, limit their jurisdiction, and create a fair court where every president has two appointments to that Supreme Court, those two reforms, these are bills I'm on with my colleague, Senator Whitehouse. Those two reforms could bring this court back in alignment with the people and not just the powerful.   As an American who has all the basic rights she needs.... nah, bro. Source: @CoryBooker on @MSNOWNews's The Last Word, 6/30/26 pic.twitter.com/rKlEiIamrq — Cici Marie (@Cici_Marie_1776) July 1, 2026   If the Democrats do take back the government, it’s possible they would shove these anti-Constitutional reforms through to poison the Court from within. The transcripts are below. Click "expand" to read: MS NOW's The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell 6/30/26 10:12:21 p.m. Eastern (...) LAWRENCE O'DONNELL: And leading off our coverage tonight is Professor Laurence Tribe, who has taught Constitutional Law at Harvard Law School for five decades.  Professor Tribe, I know you've been waiting for this decision, as we all have, since it was - the Court agreed to take the case in the first place. Were you - can you explain to us why all nine Justices could not read that simple language of birthright citizenship the same way? LAURENCE TRIBE: Well, they certainly could read it the same way if they were being honest lawyers without any agenda.  Nobody took seriously this strange argument that the 14th Amendment doesn't mean what it says, that the language 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof,' means something other than being subject to the power of the United States, which applies to everybody born here, unless they happen to be born in a foreign embassy or in a foreign military encampment, they could all read it.  But gradually, what sociologists and philosophers call 'the Overton window,' the range of argument that is considered at least worth taking seriously, gradually that shifted. It shifted because Donald Trump and Stephen Miller wanted to find lawyers who would argue this completely ahistorical position, atextual, ahistorical, inconsistent with what Ketanji Brown Jackson rightly described as the 'second founding' of the country. They wanted to find lawyers who would read it in this odd, different way. And sure enough, they did.  I didn't expect this decision to be unanimous. Even before the argument, we knew that there were indications in some of the writings of Clarence Thomas in particular, but also Samuel Alito, who suggested they might come up with some way to agree with the revisionist lawyers. What we did not know, what I think very few people predicted, was that on the basic Constitutional issue, this Court would rule five to four.  In fact, a lot of the reporting of the decision misses the point. Some of them say, 'Well, it was five and a half to three and a half because Justice Kavanaugh dissented only in part.' No, no, no. He was very clear on the Constitutional question. He agreed with Clarence Thomas and with Justice Gorsuch and Justice Alito.  And so, four Justices, four Supreme Court Justices just couldn't seem to read the language or the history the way anybody who has studied this subject outside the context of wanting to please Donald Trump and the revisionists, understood it to mean. So it was five to four.  That means that we are a heartbeat away from basically repealing the core part of the 14th Amendment, the part that defines what America is, that America is a nation where each human being is valued for him or herself, where it is not who your parents were or where they came from, but who you are. Were you born here? Then you're a citizen. Were you naturalized? Then you're a citizen. It's not a matter of ancestry. It's not a matter of ethnicity or race.  And I think Justice Jackson hit the nail on the head when she said, 'It's supremely ironic for the Justice, who most vividly insists that ours is a colorblind constitution to transmute what was a fundamental principle about being an American into a specific remedy for a racially odious decision, Dred Scott v. Sandford.'  Five to four. It's really - that's the news. That's the sad news. O'DONNELL: Justice Alito seems to think that the invention of the jet engine should therefore have changed the Constitution, because he believes now that it's just too easy for a pregnant woman to get on a plane and get to this country and give birth in this country and thereby obtain citizenship for that child.  But he should know that his ancestors were -  and ours were coming over to this country on ships now, for hundreds of years, pregnant women were arriving on these shores for hundreds of years from impoverished places on the planet, hoping that there might be more food here than the place they left. TRIBE: Well, that's true, and he's discovered something that most people have known for hundreds of years. Yes, a pregnant woman can come to the United States of America, have a baby, and that baby is an American.  If he doesn't like it, he can propose a Constitutional Amendment that would get rid of it. But you don't get rid of it by executive order. You don't get rid of it by statute, which is something that Justice Kavanaugh seems to think you could do, because he doesn't think the Constitution means what it says.  The fact that somebody can come here and have a baby and the baby is an American is part of the nature of this country. We are to that extent, a country that is built on land, not on blood.  They have this idea, the revisionists, that it is the DNA or the - your ancestry, where you came from.  We're all equal. They don't seem to understand that, as Justice Jackson pointed out, the point of this language was to ensure that the premise of the Declaration of Independence about equality was a promise that we could really begin to meet.  That's why people think of it as the second founding, the Great Emancipator Abraham Lincoln recognized when he read Dred Scott that that was a terrible, odious decision, not just because of what it said about slaves and former slaves, not just because it dehumanized Black people in this country, but because it created a caste system. It obliterated the idea that all people are equal. The core idea that the Declaration of Independence said was self-evidently true, but it's not self-evidently true, it seems, to those Justices who want to reconstruct a hierarchical society.  In fact, the dissenters accuse the Chief Justice and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson and Justice Barrett and Justice Sotomayor and Justice Kagan of a return to feudalism because they make things turn on the land. They don't seem to understand what feudalism is.  The ahistorical character as well as the legally blind and illiterate character of the dissenting views in this case is astonishing, but it is frightening because it represents the views of all but one of - you know, it's views of four Justices. All it takes is a shift of one.  That's why I think we really have to think seriously about reforming the Court when we have the votes to do it, because the Court is now stacked in a direction that is profoundly ahistorical, profoundly anti-Constitutional. O'DONNELL: Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe, thank you very much for starting off our coverage tonight. TRIBE: Thank you for having me, Lawrence. MS NOW's The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell 6/30/26 10:27:45 p.m. (...) LAWRENCE O'DONNELL: And joining us now is David Blight, Yale University Professor of History and Black Studies. He's the author of the Pulitzer Prize winning book, Frederick Douglass: Prophet of Freedom. And Professor Blight, Justice Jackson quoted your book and your writing in her opinion today. We just heard Professor Tribe talk about the historical references made by the Justices. And I know this is always an interesting exercise for you to read the amateur historian work done in Supreme Court opinions. What was your reading of this one today? DAVID BLIGHT: Justice Jackson was not an amateur today. Quite, quite the opposite in fact.  I already emailed the Executive Director of the Organization of American Historians, and I said, 'Is there any way we could put Jackson's opinion in the next issue of the Journal of American History?' Because, frankly, Lawrence, it reads like a historical essay. It is a historical essay, it's deeply researched, she not only quotes from me or quotes Frederick Douglass several times, but six, seven other historians, the best historians of Reconstruction.  And, you know, it sets up her essential argument, which is that Section One of the 14th - and especially birthright citizenship, is rooted in universalist principles.  And she even ends by not only quoting Douglass, which, by the way, at least three of the nine Justices did in today's opinions. Thomas did too, of course. Thomas loves Frederick Douglass for his own peculiar ways. But even Justice Roberts quoted Douglass at the very beginning.  But Justice Jackson ends by going to a section in my book. It was so moving to me, I must tell you, where I - it's 1866, Frederick Douglass is out on the circuit, he's arguing for the 14th Amendment. He's making the case that the country has to get behind this. And he does what he always did. He went to the Old Testament, he went to Genesis.  And Justice Jackson quotes the passage from Genesis 18-19, where it's God wrecking holy Hell on Sodom and Gomorrah, and there's nothing left of the towns. It's just all burnt, burnt Earth. And then he has Abraham, the prophet, overlooking the scene and saying, 'Nations must have memories. Nations must remember this.' Of course, the metaphor is, Americans have just experienced their Civil War, and they're now remaking themselves. 'Remember, as you remake yourselves.' That was Jackson going to a source to make a universalist point, a universalist argument about the meaning of birthright citizenship.  And I have to say, she took on her colleague Justice Thomas directly. She took him to the shed. I mean, she ripped him for his misuses of history and his, frankly, 80-whatever page meandering analysis of this idea of domicile and this idea that 'The jurisdiction thereof' and this idea that it's going to be wandering foreigners, and, he even uses that term 'strangers,' 'foreigners wandering through this country demanding citizenship.' It was such an ugly, in Thomas's case, an ugly kind of argument against immigration. He converted his 80-some page dissent into a frankly ugly argument against immigration. And Justice Jackson called him. O'DONNELL: The - you know, my great-grandfather moved his family here when my grandfather was about eight years old. And my grandfather then was able to become a citizen. And then his children then had birthright citizenship. And I'm the second-- BLIGHT: Same with me! O'DONNELL: --second generation of birthright citizenship here. And it seems - one just wonders what - how Samuel Alito thinks he got his citizenship in this country. BLIGHT: Well, I can't answer for what's exactly in Samuel Alito's head, or Clarence Thomas's or Kavanaugh's, but what they really have is essentially a political and racial ideology. They have a racial vision of this country. They have a political and racial ideology in search of a history that's not there. But they're going to insist on finding one.  And frankly, Lawrence, I had this reaction today, and I've had it for actually, months.  Most Americans are going to think about their grandparents and great-grandparents and so on when they hear about this decision. We've all got this story. Millions and millions of us, my German-born grandparents, came here in the late 1890s. My mother was born here and is hence a citizen, and therefore I am. I mean, it's that simple. And we've all got that story. I mean, virtually everyone.  But this is - and this idea of Alito, what does he do? He goes in the first paragraph of his dissent. He goes to this business of birth tourism. This is what I mean by an ideology in search of a history that - they're reaching.  I mean, it's painful, almost, to read how much they are reaching to try to twist the birthright citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment into something that would fit this racial and political, ideological vision of this country.  And I share Professor Tribe's fear that this really is a five-four decision. When you read Kavanaugh saying, 'Okay, it's really up to Congress. Go ahead, Congress.' That's how close we are.  And frankly, let's admit it again. Section One of the 14th Amendment is what holds this country together. What else has held us together for 160 years but this idea of our pluralism. It's really messy. We have terrible conflicts. We always will.  But Section One of the 14th Amendment is the - it's like the angel hovering over us that whatever else we do wrong, whatever, you know, missteps we make in the world, we've still got that. It still holds us together as a community, whatever we are, whoever we are, color, religion, anything.  It's the 14th Amendment that remade the United States. That's what the new founding really is. The new founding is not just in Section One of the 14th amendment, but without it, there would have been no refounding. O'DONNELL: Pulitzer Prize winning historian David Blight such an honor to have you join us tonight. Thank you very much for the important work you've done that was cited by the Supreme Court today. And thank you for joining us tonight. BLIGHT: Thanks, Lawrence. MS NOW's The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell 6/30/26 10:42:24 p.m. (...) LAWRENCE O'DONNELL: And joining our coverage now is Democratic Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey. He is a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which has jurisdiction over the Supreme Court-- CORY BOOKER: I just want to say reverential awe. I don't know if there's a TV show on where you have the titans of history in Blight - in Bright and titans of legal jurisprudence and thought in Tribe, two amazing men. I feel like you've had Batman, Superman, and now you're having the head of the neighborhood watch on. O'DONNELL: We're very, very glad you - but you have a role that they don't have. And we're going to get to that, Professor Tribe talking about the need for reform of the Supreme Court. We'll see what's possible. BOOKER: But just give a nod to Ketanji Brown Jackson-- O'DONNELL: Yes-- BOOKER: --who came on the court-- O'DONNELL: --please do.  BOOKER: --had the most brutal confirmation hearing, came on the Court and did not remain quiet or silent.  She's writing opinions that are so pointed, so powerful, that she is not just speaking to the high-minded intellectual legal scholars. She is speaking to the very idea of America.  And at the 250th anniversary, as the first Black woman ever on that Court, she is affirming what it really means to be an American to these others who are betraying it clearly, and trying to change and contort and pervert our history. God bless Ketanji Brown Jackson. (...) 10:45:19 p.m. BOOKER: This is a corrupt Court. And we know that because there's a billionaire class. And my brother, Senator Whitehouse, points this out so much. There's a billionaire class that circles around this, they lavish Supreme Court members with gifts, RV's, paying family tuitions, lavish vacations. In New Jersey, if judge did that, they would be carried out in handcuffs, put in prison. There is a Court now that is on the side of the billionaires and the powerful in every decision you can trace it. 'Where is this? Is this going to hurt billionaires or help billionaires? Is it going to help concentrate the power or not?' So I believe, if anything that America is seeing this, if you're just an American that wants basic rights, that sees this Court that's taken away your voting rights and your reproductive rights, in addition to advantaging the wealthy and the privileged in this country. This is a moment you have to agree with. What is an urgency in my life on the judiciary committee, in my life, in public life, to rein that Court in, to put 100% - put the highest Court in the land, the highest ethics laws in the number two, what Professor Tribe alluded to. We must put term limits on the court. Take people that have been there for more than 18 years, limit their jurisdiction, and create a fair court where every president has two appointments to that Supreme Court, those two reforms, these are bills I'm on with my with my colleague, Senator Whitehouse. Those two reforms could bring this court back in alignment with the people and not just the powerful. July 3rd, 2026 5:42 AM Siena Do 295816 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/jorge-bonilla/2026/07/02/deflecting-pool-abc-blames-trump-reflecting-pool-vandalism The indictment against the man accused of defacing the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool was a unique opportunity for algae to return to the Elitist Media evening news after a one-day break. ABC took this as an opportunity to indulge their reflexive Trump derangement, and practically blame him for the defacement. Watch the report in its entirety, as aired on ABC World News Tonight on Thursday, July 2nd, 2026: WATCH: after a night off, algae returns to the evening news. For @ABCWorldNews, an opportunity to indulge their TDS and practically blame Trump for the defacement of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool pic.twitter.com/9g8Z55f55I — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) July 3, 2026 DAVID MUIR: Tonight, the Justice Department now charging a former American Olympian for damaging the Reflecting Pool in Washington. President Trump spent $16 million in taxpayer money to paint and renovate the pool. He blamed vandals for the algae and peeling paint. Now that former Olympian has been charged and tonight he says he did nothing wrong. Here's Mary Bruce. MARY BRUCE: Tonight, the Justice Department bringing felony charges against former American Olympian David Hearn, accusing him of damaging the Reflecting Pool two weeks after he was arrested on the National Mall. President Trump spent $16 million in taxpayer money to refurbish the pool. But just one week later, it turned green with algae, parts of its freshly painted bottom rising to the surface. Trump blamed vandals, not his hand-picked contractors. DONALD TRUMP: They put a big gash- 350ft long. Think of that. 350-foot gash. BRUCE: Today, U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro accusing Hearn of damaging approximately two square feet. JEANINE PIRRO: The National Park Service employees observed Hearn actually forcefully and violently pulling up and removing the bottom liner with both hands. BRUCE: President Trump claims the alleged vandals used box cutters. TRUMP: They came in with box cutters and they cut it up. BRUCE: Today, reporters asking what Hearn allegedly used. REPORTER: Did he have any tools or was it just his bare hands? PIRRO: Right now, we believe it's his bare hands. Both hands. REPORTER: So does that indicate, in your belief, that it was probably damaged before or do you believe that he… PIRRO: Oh, he damaged it. REPORTER: Further, but do you believe it had already been damaged before? PIRRO: He damaged the pool. BRUCE: Hearn told ABC News he was biking near the pool when he saw a piece of loose paint in the water and reached out and touched the end. He insists he's no vandal, just a “curious, concerned citizen.” And David- in a statement tonight, Hearn's attorneys insist he is innocent and say, quote, “these charges are outrageous and should be alarming to every American,” adding: “this indictment reflects the administration's effort to shift blame for their own failures.” David. MUIR: Mary Bruce, live at The White House. Thanks, Mary. The framing gives the game away, with anchor David Muir engaging in another one of his overly long introductions that could have served as its own brief, before tossing to Mary Bruce who then repeats most of it. The emphasis was to be placed on the cost of the initial repair. Chief White House Correspondent Mary Bruce, formerly Joe Biden’s chief sycophant, parrots that point before knocking Trump for not blaming the contractors that worked on the Reflecting Pool. Anything but blaming, perhaps, the people who vandalized and pulled up portions of the lining that, as ABC has made abundantly clear, cost the American taxpayer $16 million dollars. The purpose of this story, in addition to bringing algae back into the evening news, is to deflect guilt away from the people that caused damage to the Reflecting Pool. It is grim business to convey that the defacement of national monuments seems to be acceptable so long as Donald Trump is the president. But this is par for the course for Trump-deranged ABC.   July 2nd, 2026 11:49 PM Jorge Bonilla 295839 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tim-graham/2026/07/02/newsbusters-podcast-sick-socialist-wave-vs-americas-250th-birthday It's pretty sick that Socialist Revolution is the new fad in primary elections around America's 250th birthday. The media have a nasty habit of disparaging America, especially on race, and can even warn the American flag is a "red flag," now triggering people like "a MAGA hat on a stick." That's from an article on NBCNews.com.  Managing editor Curtis Houck and associate editor Nick Fondacaro joined the show to run through media happenings in the week before the Fourth of July. On Tuesday, longtime Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colorado) lost in a primary to Melat Kiros, a young Ethiopian-American "democratic socialist" who said America was to blame for 9/11, that our foreign policy made the deadly terrorist attack "inevitable....in the sense that we destabilized a lot of the Middle East. That forced people to believe that another act of violence was the only response." Democrats used to try to compete with Republican on patriotism, but in recent years, they have only been able to show their revulsion at patriotism, like it's a sickening symptom of Trumpism. We recommend you visit NewsBusters to see the Geoff Dickens collections of sickening anti-American quotes, from journalists and from celebrities. On ABC's The View, Sunny Hostin insisted our country was built on slavery and racism. In another show, co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin tried to say America is better and freer than Iran: “I think it’s very different to live in the United States in 2025 than it is in Iran.” Co-host Whoopi Goldberg shot back: “Not if you’re black!” We also discussed how all the Democrat electioneering and wild conspiracy theories and misinformation mean The View is not acting in the public interest. It was part of several filings the Media Research made at the Federal Communications Commission to challenge the broadcast license of Disney-owned ABC stations, including Nick's daily viewing of The View. It was a big week of decisions at the Supreme Court, like ruling in favor of the states banning boys from competing in girls' sports. NBC anchor Craig Melvin sounded apologetic in live coverage: "The terms that we’re using here during our reporting, biological male, biological female, the high court put those terms in quotations in their decision and their dissent. But just so you know, we’re using those terms from the decision itself, biological male, biological female." NBC reporter Kelly O’Donnell lamented President Trump “often sort of boils it down into bumper sticker language, talking about transgender athletes... It’s obviously much more complex.” It's not "more complex." You're either a female, or you're a male.  Enjoy the podcast below. The audio is found here.  July 2nd, 2026 10:28 PM Tim Graham 295838 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/catherine-mortensen/2026/07/02/red-white-and-downplayed-david-bozell-joins-wmal-explain As the nation kicks off its historic America 250 celebration this Fourth of July weekend, a massive media divide is taking center stage. On Thursday Media Research Center President David Bozell joined WMAL host host Derek Hunter to pull back the curtain on how mainstream networks and deep-blue cities are intentionally tamping down the red, white, and blue. Bozell pointed out the stark contrast between Fox News's live coverage of the Great American State Fair on the National Mall and either radio silence or cynicism from the elitist news outlets. Why the blackout on national pride? According to Bozell, severe "Trump Derangement Syndrome" has corporate media and progressive local governments trading patriotism for politics, simply because Donald Trump is at the helm. It's sad how many leftists are so blinded by hatred for Donald Trump that they can't put their politics aside to celebrate their country. @DavidBozell and @derekahunter discuss how leftists are suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome ahead of America's 250th pic.twitter.com/1I8Kx3cTRK — Media Research Center (@theMRC) July 2, 2026 Bozell also tackled how this anti-patriotic push aligns with the recent sweep of Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) candidates in primaries nationwide, prompting even some mainstream liberals to panic about the party’s radical leftward lurch. “I think there's genuine concern that these Democratic Socialists are so to the left of anything normal in the country that the Republicans can easily brand them and easily nationalize these elections, which works against the Democrats,” Bozell noted. "This DSA is so to the left of anything normal in the country."@DavidBozell and @derekahunter analyze how leftist media hosts are reacting to the DSA on @WMALDC pic.twitter.com/XzJRTuinqa — Media Research Center (@theMRC) July 2, 2026 Watch the full video here.   July 2nd, 2026 6:04 PM Catherine Mortensen 295837 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/cnsnews/craig-bannister/2026/07/02/why-arent-anti-america-leftists-protecting-migrants-coming If America truly is the 250 year-old systemically racist, economically unjust, heartless dystopia that liberals claim, why aren’t they demanding that the government secure the border to protect migrants from coming here and helping those already here escape? Logically, if they honestly believe that the U.S. has obdurately refused to reform and correct its mistakes over the past quarter-millennium, they should be: Cheering U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents. Doxing illegal immigrants. Warning citizens of other countries of the injustice, inequality and mistreatment they’d be subjected to, if they come to the U.S., and Demanding incentives for migrants to leave for a more just, compassionate country with better opportunities. Anti-America activist citizens and celebrities complaint to the U.S. government and the general public about the evils of America – but they do nothing to warn those who might come here of the horrors and injustice that they claim await them. Instead, they demand the U.S. open its borders and grant citizenship to anyone who enters the country, legally or illegally. Why? Because they know better. They understand that America is, indeed, the land of the free and the home of the brave – a country superior to all others, past and present. They just won't admit it. July 2nd, 2026 4:07 PM Craig Bannister 295831 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/cnsnews/aidan-tetreault/2026/07/02/scotus-decision-opens-door-more-state-bans-men-womens The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld state laws requiring athletes to participate on sports teams according to their biological sex, arguing that these laws violate neither the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause nor Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972.  In its opinion, The Court holds that neither Title IX nor the Equal Protection Clause require West Virginia or Idaho to allow men who identify as women to participate in women’s athletics, a ruling which signals legal approval to the other state that have already enacted similar laws.  The text of the opinion, however, appears to lay the groundwork for legal challenges against states that allow male participation in female sports. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, writing for the Court, sites a 1975 regulation from the Department of Health, Education, and Wellness, which “required that schools provide ‘equal athletic opportunity for members of both sexes.’” These regulations were promulgated by directive of the 1974 Javits Amendment, which applied the principle behind Title IX to the area of school athletics, and they remain in effect today, according to the opinion.  Additionally, Kavanaugh cites comments by Justice John Paul Stevens regarding a 1980 Supreme Court case: “Without a gender-based classification in competitive contact sports, there would be a substantial risk that boys would dominate the girls’ programs and deny them an equal opportunity to compete in interscholastic events.”  Given that Title IX protects students from being denied the benefits of any educational activity on the basis of sex, Justice Kavanaugh implies that any school athletic organization that allows boys to play in girls’ sports may be in violation of the regulation.  Currently, cases which allege just that are making their way through the federal judicial system, including lawsuits filed by the Trump Administration against states which allow men to compete in women’s sports.  In April of last year, the Trump Administration sued the Maine Department of Education, alleging that its “policies and actions are harming girls by denying girls the opportunity to compete in student sports on a level playing field in which they have the same opportunities as boys.” Last July, the Administration sued the California Department of Education and the California Interscholastic Federation, the organization that runs California’s high school athletics, alleging the same.  This past March, the Trump Administration also filed suit against Minnesota on similar grounds. Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dillon praised the Supreme Court decision on X.com, suggesting the Justice Department will remain diligent in its efforts to protect women’s sports: “Thanks to the SCOTUS ruling, we have new tools in @TheJusticeDept cases in MN & CA re boys in girls’ sports. “It is ILLEGAL to force girls to compete against boys and we @CivilRights are on it!” July 2nd, 2026 3:33 PM Aidan Tetreault 295830 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/nicholas-fondacaro/2026/07/02/cnn-wants-blame-ice-deporting-venezuelans-caught-earthquakes CNN has found a way to squeeze in some anti-ICE propaganda into their coverage of the deadly earthquakes in Venezuela, and place blame on them for some of the casualties. On Wednesday’s OutFront, the network highlighted a story of woman in Caracas who was recently deported there “just hours before the tremors started.” Of course, the implication was that without ICE booting her from the country, she wouldn’t have gotten hurt and the others deported with her wouldn’t be missing. “We've also learned now that more than 100 Venezuelans who were deported from the U.S. just hours before the quake struck had been taken to a hotel not far from the epicenter, that hotel collapsed,” announced fill-in host Erica Hill. CNN contributor Stefano Pozzebon pointed to the story of Ninoska Gutierrez, who was deported from the United States late last month and was trapped under rubble before freeing herself: She said she escaped miraculously with just minor injuries, scrapes and bruises, slipping from under the rubble and walking for two miles before finding help. But this latest tragedy, part of an endless list of blows. She fled Venezuela's economic crisis in 2018, and had been living in Minnesota as an undocumented immigrant since 2024. “Scared by the unrest in Minneapolis, she moved to Miami, where after an incident with her daughter, she was arrested, charged with a misdemeanor, and transferred to ICE custody,” Pozzebon lamented.   CNN decries ICE for deporting illegal Venezuelan immigrants back home just before the earthquakes hit. Hints they should be held responsible responsible for them when out of their custody. pic.twitter.com/Yvw4wIVs3C — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) July 2, 2026   At no point did Pozzebon actually explain what the “incident with her daughter” entailed that got her “charged with a misdemeanor.” Given CNN’s caginess with the facts, there’s a possibility that “charged” actually means “convicted.” After playing a soundbite of Gutierrez proclaiming “The U.S. administration really made a mess with the migrants,” Pozzebon’s report painted a picture of the illegal immigrant surviving hellish conditions in ICE custody just to be put in harm’s way: GUTIERREZ: I was held for seven days in the worst conditions you can imagine. They treat us like animals. POZZEBON (voice-over): Deported on June 24, she and other 145 migrants landed in Caracas just hours before the tremors began. GUTIERREZ: They took our handcuff off. Thank God, because finally I was going to be free. POZZEBON (voice-over): Gutierrez and the others were in this hotel when the walls began to shake, the floor crumbling under her feet. POZZEBON: I mean, when you got out of there, what did you see? GUTIERREZ: I couldn't believe it. I don't know if I was conscious or not. Everything was so fast, and I asked God, why did you allow this? POZZEBON (voice-over): Venezuelan authorities are yet to say how many of the 146 deportees died in the earthquake. Many are still missing. To make ICE look heartless, Pozzebon followed up the line about the missing illegals with a cherry-picked quote from an ICE statement about how, “When an individual is no longer in ICE custody, the agency is no longer responsible for them.” Counter point: if she didn’t enter America illegally or commit a misdemeanor, she wouldn’t have been deported. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: CNN’s OutFront July 1, 2026 7:53:42 p.m. Eastern ERICA HILL: We've also learned now that more than 100 Venezuelans who were deported from the U.S. just hours before the quake struck had been taken to a hotel not far from the epicenter, that hotel collapsed. Our Stefano Pozzebon just spoke with one of the survivors. He's OUTFRONT now in Venezuela. [Cuts to video] STEFANO POZZEBON (voice-over): It's been a week since a double earthquake devastated Venezuela. But for Ninoska Gutierrez, the pain feels very fresh. NINOSKA GUTIERREZ (via translator]: My legs were straight, but I had a beam on top of me, trapping me. I couldn't feel my legs. POZZEBON (voice-over): She said she escaped miraculously with just minor injuries, scrapes and bruises, slipping from under the rubble and walking for two miles before finding help. But this latest tragedy, part of an endless list of blows. She fled Venezuela's economic crisis in 2018, and had been living in Minnesota as an undocumented immigrant since 2024. GUTIERREZ: This year, two U.S. citizens died for defending us. The U.S. administration really made a mess with the migrants. POZZEBON (voice-over): Scared by the unrest in Minneapolis, she moved to Miami, where after an incident with her daughter, she was arrested, charged with a misdemeanor, and transferred to ICE custody. GUTIERREZ: I was held for seven days in the worst conditions you can imagine. They treat us like animals. POZZEBON (voice-over): Deported on June 24, she and other 145 migrants landed in Caracas just hours before the tremors began. GUTIERREZ: They took our handcuff off. Thank God, because finally I was going to be free. POZZEBON (voice-over): Gutierrez and the others were in this hotel when the walls began to shake, the floor crumbling under her feet. POZZEBON: I mean, when you got out of there, what did you see? GUTIERREZ: I couldn't believe it. I don't know if I was conscious or not. Everything was so fast, and I asked God, why did you allow this? POZZEBON (voice-over): Venezuelan authorities are yet to say how many of the 146 deportees died in the earthquake. Many are still missing. In a statement to CNN, ICE said that, “When an individual is no longer in ICE custody, the agency is no longer responsible for them.” At home, Gutierrez is somehow trying to rebuild her life. She reconnected with her daughter, Oriana, a daughter she had not seen in four years. And in signs that life goes on, despite a tragedy, her niece has just given birth to a healthy baby. July 2nd, 2026 2:25 PM Nicholas Fondacaro 295827 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/free-speech/gabriela-pariseau/2026/07/02/google-news-turns-americas-250-milestone-negative America’s 250th anniversary should be a time for unity, for Americans to take pride in the country’s culture and accomplishments made possible by our constitutional freedoms. But Google News and the elitist media have tried to turn what should have been a triumphant national milestone into yet another opportunity to get jabs at President Donald Trump.  Rather than highlighting inspiring feature stories about American heritage, innovation, and tenacious spirit, Google News delivered a steady diet of negativity. The digital gatekeeper elevated story after story that framed patriotic events, like Americans praying on the National Mall and the Great American State Fair in the worst possible light, with not one positive story about the ongoing Freedom 250 events. MRC Findings:  Google News pushed 17 stories tied to Freedom 250 celebrations in June, including Rededicate 250, the White House UFC Fight, The Great American State Fair and the renovations of the Lincoln Memorial reflecting pool. Every one of them was negative. Although there were plenty of inspiring and positive pieces, Google News could have chosen. But Google’s unspoken commitment to limiting right-leaning media sources excluded these stories. Google promoted a story that reduced the “Rededicate 250” event—gathering Americans to pray together on the National Mall— to coverage of a fuel leak. “30 gallons of fuel spilled on National Mall after event for America’s 250th birthday,” the NBC News headline read, failing to mention that the spill was reportedly an act of vandalism, not negligence. The Great American State Fair, a nonpolitical event celebrating American history and culture on the National Mall, was another media punching bag. Google News pushed a USA Today headline: “Great American State Fair opens with power outages, empty booths.” The headline conveniently left out what the article only concedes several paragraphs deep: many fairgoers had a great time at the event.  BuzzFeed went even lower, with one Google News headline blaring: “Vanilla Ice's Freedom 250 Concert Was Canceled For the Most Embarrassing Reason Ever.” This was even toned down from the headline BuzzFeed included on its website. While Vanilla Ice’s performance was indeed cancelled due to rain and forecasted thunderstorms, BuzzFeed used the story to politicize the celebration of American culture and Google was all too happy to promote the story. “Most of the announced slate of performers for the affiliated 'Freedom 250’ concerts have since dropped out… For, uh, obvious reasons,” the outlet wrote, sneering at Trump’s presidency.  Even aside from the Freedom 250 events, Google News amplified 12 stories about the absurdly controversial Lincoln Memorial reflecting pool renovations, which were repainted for the festivities. The reflecting pool has been a notorious money pit of maintenance headaches for nearly a century, plagued by sinking structures, leakage, algae and repairs. Yet the legacy media treated Trump’s maintenance attempt as the latest attack on his competence. The headlines and stories that Google News pushed reek of journalists taking pains to make drama out of a barely important story. The Washington Post had perhaps the most dramatic example of this with a column headlined: “At this point, the Reflecting Pool deserves an Emmy,” with the subheadline: “The scene unfolding on the National Mall is the must-watch show of the summer. It’s a drama. A farce. A whodunit. A murder mystery.” Other ridiculous headlines included: “A dead duck was seen in the Reflecting Pool. Then two more were found nearby,” by The Washington Post, promoted on June 23. “It’s not easy being green: Trump’s botched reflecting pool becomes 2,028ft metaphor,” by The Guardian, promoted on June 23. “Exclusive: Firm that worked on past Reflecting Pool renovation passed on Trump project after deeming it ‘unfeasible,’” by CNN, promoted on June 26. “The Reflecting Pool Appears to Be Rejecting Its Makeover,” by The New York Times, promoted on June 20. News outlets also went town with critical stories after chunks of “American flag blue” paint began surfacing in the reflecting pool. Law enforcement has reportedly made several arrests for vandalism, accusing suspects of cutting into the paint with knives.  “Troubled Reflecting Pool faces fresh scrutiny over vandalism claims and duck deaths,” by The Associated Press promoted on June 24. “Trump claims Reflecting Pool was vandalized and says law enforcement is investigating,” by CNN, promoted on June 20. “Davey Hearn: Former Olympian denies vandalising Washington Reflecting Pool after arrest,” by BBC promoted on June 21. There was no shortage of inspiring and positive pieces available to Google News. But the tech giant’s unwillingness to give a voice to right-leaning media sources barred unifying Freedom 250 stories from breaking through.  Breitbart has a whole page of its website devoted to “Celebrating American Greatness” in the lead-up to America’s milestone birthday.  Other pro-America stories included:  “Great American State Fair opens in DC with flyovers, Ferris wheel for America 250,” by Fox News.  “'Great American State Fair' Kicks Off US 250th,” by Newmax. Trump kicks off Great American State Fair celebrating America’s 250th anniversary: ‘The best is yet to come,’” by New York Post. “Exclusive—Richard C. Lyons: ‘Everybody Must and Will Be a Soldier’: The American Tradition of Service and Sacrifice Started in 1776” by Breitbart. Methodology: Using MRC’s Digital News Tracker, MRC Free Speech America researchers examined the top 20 stories promoted by Google News in the month of June. Researchers looked for any stories that made mention of the 250th anniversary of America’s founding, Freedom 250 celebrations, or preparations for Freedom 250 celebrations, like the Lincoln Memorial reflecting pool renovations.  Researchers then analyzed headlines and stories for story framing, wording, the inclusion or exclusion of key details. For example, researchers found stories where the first half of the story and headline noted everything wrong with a Freedom 250 event before explaining that this did not seem to bother those in attendance. Researchers similarly analyzed the hedging language used to frame quotes from President Trump in comparison to those accused of a crime. July 2nd, 2026 1:17 PM Gabriela Pariseau 295823 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/clay-waters/2026/07/02/pbs-still-dreaming-american-dream-slippingout-reach-daca-illegals Monday’s PBS News Hour took sides on DACA, the acronym for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, children brought to America by illegal immigrant parents and allowed to stay (known in sympathetic media circles as "The Dreamers," named after a failed Obama-era bill). Co-anchor Geoff Bennett's rendition of the DACA mythos was perhaps the most objectionable part of the segment, in front of a cloying graphic of an American flag and the words “Dreams Deferred.” Geoff Bennett: The American dream is slipping further out of reach for young adults who were brought to this country without authorization as children, known as DACA recipients. That is the conclusion of a new report, which argues the barriers they face are driven not by a lack of ambition or talent, but by policy. Liz Landers speaks with one of the report’s authors. When was the last time PBS declared any regard for “The American Dream,” as opposed to issuing sour critiques of the direction of the country? Reporter Liz Landers: This month marks 14 years since the creation of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA. For more than 500,000 Dreamers, many of them now in their 30s, their future in this country is uncertain. The policy established under the Obama administration offered undocumented immigrants who entered the U.S. as minors a renewable two-year period of protection from deportation. To qualify, recipients must have been living in the U.S. before June 15, 2007, be in school or have a diploma, and have no criminal record. The Trump administration is chipping away at the policy, leaving the fate of many of its rules and regulations to ongoing court challenges… PBS anchor Geoff Bennett goes to bad for the so-called Dreamers: "The American dream is slipping further out of reach for young adults who were brought to this country without authorization as children, known as DACA recipients." pic.twitter.com/pIMSInFjNF — Clay Waters 🇮🇱 (@claywaters44) June 30, 2026 Landers spoke with Gaby Pacheco, chief executive of TheDream.US, which conducted the survey and compiled the report. Policy research by activist groups is PBS's favorite type of policy research.  Pacheco has been a Dreamer activist since at least 2010, when she was cited in a notorious New York Times story as one of a grand total of four protesters marching “to Washington to protest what they called the Obama administration’s lack of action on legislation granting legal status to illegal immigrants.” Apparently Pacheco hasn’t suffered too much in the interim, having built a career around the issue while she remained in the country. Landers: Some of these recipients have been deported and detained. Does DACA still offer the protections that it once did? Pacheco: ….Unfortunately, right now, where we stand on DACA is, we have the Fifth Circuit that said, yes, we believe that people should have protections. Unfortunately, that’s been over a year, so we don’t really know…. PBS has covered the plight of recently deported DACA recipients extensively since Trump’s second-term immigration crackdown, while ignoring the case of DACA recipient Abraham Hermosillo Alvarez, originally from Mexico, alleged to have directed a terror attack plot against the White House’s UFC gala. Also left unquestioned in the segment: The idea behind DACA itself, that those “childhood arrivals,” average age now 32, according to Landers, still have a right to remain in America after all this time. Landers, who recently married former CNN reporter Jim Acosta, lamented the administration pressure being placed on them to leave. Landers: The Trump administration has admitted to deporting Dreamers and is openly pushing and advocating for Dreamers to self-deport. How do these slow-walking renewals, the stripping of protections from HHS and other agencies, and barring this professional licensure increase the pressure to do that? Do you see rising pressure on Dreamers to self-deport? A transcript is available, click “Expand.” PBS News Hour 6/29/26 7:30:38 p.m. (ET) GEOFF BENNETT: The American dream is slipping further out of reach for young adults who were brought to this country without authorization as children, known as DACA recipients. That is the conclusion of a new report, which argues the barriers they face are driven not by a lack of ambition or talent, but by policy. Liz Landers speaks with one of the report’s authors. LIZ LANDERS: This month marks 14 years since the creation of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA. For more than 500,000 dreamers, many of them now in their 30s, their future in this country is uncertain. The policy established under the Obama administration offered undocumented immigrants who entered the U.S. as minors a renewable two-year period of protection from deportation. To qualify, recipients must have been living in the U.S. before June 15, 2007, be in school or have a diploma, and have no criminal record. The Trump administration is chipping away at the policy, leaving the fate of many of its rules and regulations to ongoing court challenges. The report, in their own words, examines the postgraduate trajectories of more than 2,500 dreamers with college degrees. It finds White House policy changes stripping many of some form of legal status or work authorization, leaving one in five of these graduates fully undocumented. Gaby Pacheco is president and CEO of TheDream.US, the organization that conducted the survey and compiled the report. Gaby, thank you for joining us. GABY PACHECO, President and CEO, TheDream.US: Thank you for having me.   LIZ LANDERS: Where does DACA stand now? There are long wait times for the renewal of DACA recipients. GABY PACHECO: Yes. LIZ LANDERS: Some of these recipients have been deported and detained. Does DACA still offer the protections that it once did? GABY PACHECO: I wish I can say yes with certainty. Unfortunately, right now, where we stand on DACA is, we have the Fifth Circuit that said, yes, we believe that people should have protections. Unfortunately, that’s been over a year, so we don’t really know. And what we have been seeing from the Department of Homeland Security and the Trump administration is that they have been, in essence, dismantling the program little by little by either making the renewals delayed, by ensuring that certain DACA recipients from certain countries cannot get status or get their DACA renewed, and that over 100,000 people that apply for DACA still have their DACA, the initial DACA paused. LIZ LANDERS: DACA protections include work authorization. Can you lay out some of the differences career-wise between the alumni in your report who are fully undocumented versus those who do have those work permits? GABY PACHECO: Yes, what we see is that individuals that have work authorization, six months after they’re graduating, they’re finding jobs. And they’re finding full-time jobs. They’re finding jobs in their field. They are fulfilled, and they have been able to actually make more money than their parents combined. And that, to us, is just exactly what this program is about, creating that generational change and ensuring that young people who are talented and who want to give back can contribute. On the other hand, the people that do not have work authorization have a lot harder time finding work, and they have lower-paying jobs, they struggle. LIZ LANDERS: The average age of a DACA recipient now is about 32 years old. GABY PACHECO: Yes. LIZ LANDERS: They have dependents, families of their own. Has the policy kept up with the aging of this demographic? GABY PACHECO: I don’t think so, specifically because the way that we talk about dreamers and DACA recipients tends to be very paternalistic. We talk about it as if they’re young kids. Realistically, there are some DACA recipients that are into their 40s. We know that over 300,000 U.S. citizen children or more have a parent that has DACA. We know that DACA recipients own homes. We know that DACA recipients have been, some of them, working in the same job for the last 14 years since they got DACA. And what we see, right, is that the policy and also our country has not realized and our leaders in our country the potential of integrating this community fully into our country. What we do not -- what we know is that they’re paying billions of dollars in taxes, and, unfortunately, they have to live in two-year increments at a time. LIZ LANDERS: You were an undocumented student yourself and one of the architects of DACA. Fourteen years in, is the program still serving the purpose it was designed for? GABY PACHECO: I would dare to say that the DACA program is likely one of the most successful immigration programs we have had in our 250 years of our country. I own my own home. I have been able to fulfill myself, right? I pay a lot in taxes and contribute. And this is the story of integration. I used to hear this a lot. Why don’t you just make the line? And I’m like, there’s no line. I will make the line if there were. LIZ LANDERS: The Trump administration has admitted to deporting dreamers and is openly pushing and advocating for dreamers to self-deport. How do these slow-walking renewals, the stripping of protections from HHS and other agencies, and barring this professional licensure increase the pressure to do that? Do you see rising pressure on dreamers to self-deport? GABY PACHECO: I think that is the point of what they’re trying to do. And it’s a bit confusing, because what you hear from the mouth of the president about dreamers is very positive. DONALD TRUMP, President of the United States: Republicans are very open to the dreamers. KRISTEN WELKER, Moderator, "Meet the Press": You want them to be able to stay? That’s what you’re saying. DONALD TRUMP: I do. I want to be able to work something out. GABY PACHECO: He understands the issue. He says he wants to do something. Yet the policy and what we’re seeing coming out from the administration and the Department of Homeland Security is completely contrary to that. And the solution is right in the hands of everybody, but yet nobody wants to do something about it. LIZ LANDERS: You have been advocating for these legislative changes. Do you think that Congress is going to do anything? GABY PACHECO: They have to. And it is up to us to use our voice to push members of Congress to take action and to take action, sooner, rather than later, because, as we see, people are suffering, people are getting deported, people are losing their jobs, and this is not good for our country. LIZ LANDERS: Gaby Pacheco, thank you so much for coming in. GABY PACHECO: Thank you for having me. July 2nd, 2026 1:17 PM Clay Waters 295798 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/cnsnews/craig-bannister/2026/07/02/job-growth-moderates-june-easing-fears-interest-rate-hike Monthly job growth remained above its 12-month average in June, but softened enough to ease concerns that the Federal Reserve might increase interest rates, the Commerce Department’s latest employment report shows. Seasonally-adjusted total nonfarm payroll employment added 57,000 jobs, short of analysts’ expectations, but higher than the 36,000 average monthly job growth over the prior 12 months, according to the report. And, even with downward revisions to the numbers for April and May, the U.S. economy has added an average of 111,000 jobs over the last three months. Meanwhile, the nation’s unemployment rate dipped from 4.3% in May to 4.2% last month, defying analysts’ predictions that it would be unchanged. While the U.S. unemployment rate has remained in a narrow rate in recent months, June’s rate is still the lowest for any month since June of 2025. What’s more, the nation’s unemployment has been 4.5% or lower in every month since October of 2021 - the longest unbroken streak of monthly rates that low since the late 1960’s. In June, employment continued to trend up in professional and business services, social assistance, and health care. The number of jobs in leisure and hospitality fell over the month. By sector, notable changes in employment from May to June include: Professional and Business Services: +36,000 - 172,000 jobs added since a recent low in October 2025. Social Assistance: +25,000 – higher than its average growth of 16,000 over the prior 12 months. Health Care: +22,000. Leisure and Hospitality: -61,000 in June, reflecting weaker than usual seasonal hiring. Employment showed little or no change over the month in other major industries, including government. “U.S. Hiring Continues at a Steady but Slower Pace,” The New York Times reported in an article presenting analysis of Thursday’s jobs report by several of the publication’s economic, business and financial reporters. “Employment figures for June showed the American economy continues to stride past obstacles including the inflationary pressures of the war with Iran,” Economics Reporter Talmon Joseph Smith wrote, observing that “economic durability may be the emerging norm.” “The report is still basically consistent with the idea that the labor market has firmed after last year’s wobbles,” Chief Economics Correspondent Ben Casselman observed, noting that wage gains were “solid” in June. “Manufacturing continues to look like it’s stabilizing after shedding jobs in 2024 and 2025,” Business Reporter Sydney Ember wrote, citing the sector’s addition of 3,000 jobs in June. July 2nd, 2026 1:02 PM Craig Bannister 295822 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/geoffrey-dickens/2026/07/02/poll-what-was-worst-media-quote-week POLL: What was the worst media quote of the week? (Vote below)   Watch @Schineman present the Worst Quotes from @Lawrence, @esglaude, and @JoyVBehar pic.twitter.com/PcdMxJNxT0 — Media Research Center (@theMRC) July 2, 2026   NOMINEES:    “Donald” Is Now the New “Adolf” of Baby Names “Well, Donald Trump has scored his lowest job approval rating yet in a Reuters poll at 34 percent. And we have what could be another measure of Donald Trump’s unpopularity and disapproval: baby names. Donald is the new Adolf. The baby name Donald has hit its lowest point in popularity in American history….Adolf dropped rather dramatically in popularity after Adolf Hitler executed six million Jewish people in death camps while he was losing World War II before he took his own life.”— Host Lawrence O’Donnell on MS NOW’s The Last Word, June 23.    Eddie Glaude on America’s 250th Birthday: I Have Not “Found Joy” in Singing the Star Spangled Banner  Co-host Mike Barnicle: “But my question to you is, do you see optimism at the end of this July 4th rainbow?”Contributor Eddie Glaude: “No, no Mike, I don’t. And it comes about, I think that, that orientation follows from, from my own formation. I don’t think I’ve ever teared up around patriotism. I don’t ever think I found joy in singing the Star Spangled Banner.” — MS NOW’s Morning Joe, June 30.    Joy Behar Thinks Every Public Service, Including Picking Up the Trash, is “Socialism” “If I fall down, I want an ambulance. If my house is on fire, bring your hose. You know what I mean?...I’m not scared of the term. I think they’re scared of the term in this country! But Social Security is a democratic socialism. Partly unemployment insurance is. The people who pick up your garbage, the people who take the fire out of your house. All of these are democratic socialism.”— Co-host Joy Behar on ABC’s The View, June 24.          Sponsored by James P. Jimirro July 2nd, 2026 12:20 PM Geoffrey Dickens 295814 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/star-parker/2026/07/02/smooth-operator-mamdani-seduces-confused-voters-sugar-coated-lies New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani has chalked up more notable victories. His candidates won three crucial Democratic primaries -- candidates who are supporters of the Democratic Socialists of America, as is Mamdani -- defeating three Democratic Party establishment candidates, two of whom are sitting members of Congress. Discussing with ABC’s Jonathan Karl, Mamdani’s eyes twinkle; he is calm, controlled and articulate. I think of Sade’s song “Smooth Operator.” AI tells us that smooth operator is “the charmer, the masterful strategist, the manipulator (deceiver).” He speaks half-truths and distortions with heartfelt sincerity that seduces his ill-informed prey. Mamdani wants to transform our free nation under God into a socialist country and still call it America. He wants to eliminate Israel as a Jewish state and still call it Israel. “What makes me proudest to be an American,” he says,” is the belief that equal rights are at the bedrock of our notion of what it means to be an American.” Of course, for Mr. Smooth Operator, he decides what those rights are. If I build a successful business and accumulate wealth by producing what consumers want, Mr. Smooth Operator doesn’t recognize my right to my wealth and property but rather, in his view, it’s his constituents, those that give him power, that have the right to my property under Mr. Smooth Operator’s narrative of what is just. Not only is this immoral, but it doesn’t work. Mountains of data show that societies that are economically free -- where rights mean that ownership and property are sacred, as in the biblical commandment “thou shalt not steal” -- are the most successful and prosperous. And societies where real rights are not recognized, where Smooth Operators decide who gets what, fail.      What about Israel? Karl notes that Democratic Socialists of America no longer support the “two-state solution” -- that is one Jewish State and one Palestinian state side by side. He asks Mamdani if this is now his position. “I support the State of Israel as a state with equal rights.... A state that privileges one religion over the other is one I can’t tell you I support,” says Mamdani. Once again, he defines what the rights are and who gets them. Let’s recall it was democracy that gave birth to the state of Israel. The United Nations voted in 1947 to partition what was then called Palestine into a Jewish state and an Arab state. That vote, which occurred in the wake of the Holocaust where 40% of the Jews in the world were murdered, recognized the right of the Jewish people to their one state. The Jews accepted the UN partition, and the Arabs rejected it. The Arabs preferred to not have a Palestinian state if the price was also establishment of a Jewish state. War, initiated by the Arabs, followed, and Israel has been fighting for its existence ever since. Freedom House, a nonpartisan institute in Washington, measures and rates 208 nations worldwide according to civil rights and political liberties. Each country is ranked free, partly free or not free. Israel, with a population of about 10 million, about 2 million of whom are Arabs, is the only country in the Middle East ranked “free” by Freedom House. There are some 50 Muslim countries in the world, constituting upwards of 2 billion Muslims. An AI search shows zero to two are ranked free. The 48-50 unfree Muslim countries do not trouble Mr. Mamdani, a Muslim. The one free Jewish country keeps him up at night. Attributed to author George Orwell is the quote, “in a time of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” Let’s celebrate our nation’s 250th birthday with the revolutionary act of telling the truth: that this is a free nation under God, where life, liberty and property are sacred. Telling the truth, boldly, clearly, courageously and without compromise is our main weapon against the many charlatans among us who threaten our future. Star Parker is founder of the Center for Urban Renewal and Education and author of “Necessary Noise, How Donald Trump Inflames the Culture War and Why this is Good News for America” July 2nd, 2026 11:42 AM Star Parker 295820 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/alex-christy/2026/07/02/ms-nows-latest-conspiracy-trans-sports-ruling-will-ban-actual MS NOW’s Ali Velshi likes to think of himself as the type of journalist who speaks “truth to power” and cares more about facts than being neutral, but on Wednesday, The 11th Hour host welcomed podcaster V Spehar to unveil MS NOW’s newest conspiracy theory: that people will use the Supreme Court’s ruling that greenlit state bans on males competing in girls’ sports to ban actual girls. Velshi led Spehar with an interesting claim, “Meanwhile, he's still trying to get his voter suppression act done. And the Republicans are still struggling with trans sports.”   MS NOW's Ali Velshi fancies himself as the kind of journalist who speaks "truth to tpower" and values facts more than neutrality, so he brought on podcaster and tin foil hatter V Spehar to attack the GOP after the Supreme Court's trans sports ruling, "Can I just be at a game and… pic.twitter.com/I8XJZRi55D — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) July 2, 2026   Republicans are not “struggling with trans sports.” The public is overwhelmingly on their side. Nevertheless, Spehar proclaimed, “They are struggling with the trans sports, and they're writing legislation that is hurting their children more. The most recent piece of legislation that just got, sort of, decided between the Supreme Court was this idea that states are allowed now to discriminate against trans kids who want to play in girls’ sports.” The reason why this issue has become important is because athletes who have previously competed as males have switched to the female competitions, but Spehar made it seem like nobody could possibly know who is transgender and who is just an athletically gifted female: Now, that's going to affect maybe 12 or 15 kids who are trans across the nation that want to play girls' sports. It's going to affect millions of little girls who play sports, because one of the things that the GOP similarly refuses to agree with Democrats on is if there's going to be a ban on trans sports, then there ought to be a ban on genital exams, because who gets to decide who's trans? Can I just be at a game and watching a girl excel and go, ‘Well, she's playing too good.’ She must be trans. Let's check her out.’ The exact number of males who are now prohibited from playing girls’ sports does not matter. It takes just one to corrupt the results. However, Spehar continued, “And in 23 states, GOP has voted no, ‘We don't want to ban genital exams. We want that to be on the table for us going forward.’ So, I just think we've reached a place of madness, Ali, like this is a crazy madness. Where the escalated investment in Trump's priorities, things like trans sports bans, while he's not prioritizing housing, have made us just absolutely lose our minds and lose focus on what is reality, what is humanity, and what are we even doing.” Both the West Virginia and Idaho laws the Court upheld allow for alternatives to genital exams, such as testosterone production and genetics, but in both states, a female athlete would only need to prove her sex if contested, which, again, would be extremely unlikely if she had always competed with other females. Here is a transcript for the July 1 show: MS NOW The 11th Hour with Ali Velshi 7/1/2026 11:11 PM ET ALI VELSHI: Meanwhile, he's still trying to get his voter suppression act done. And the Republicans are still struggling with trans sports. V SPEHAR: They are struggling with the trans sports, and they're writing legislation that is hurting their children more. The most recent piece of legislation that just got, sort of, decided between the Supreme Court was this idea that states are allowed now to discriminate against trans kids who want to play in girls’ sports. Now, that's going to affect maybe 12 or 15 kids— VELSHI: Yes. SPEHAR: —who are trans across the nation that want to play girls’ sports. It's going to affect millions of little girls who play sports, because one of the things that the GOP similarly refuses to agree with Democrats on is if there's going to be a ban on trans sports, then there ought to be a ban on genital exams, because who gets to decide who's trans? Can I just be at a game and watching a girl excel and go, “Well, she's playing too good.” She must be trans. Let's check her out." And in 23 states, GOP has voted no, “We don't want to ban genital exams. We want that to be on the table for us going forward.” So, I just think we've reached a place of madness, Ali, like this is a crazy madness. Where the escalated investment in Trump's priorities, things like trans sports bans, while he's not prioritizing housing, have made us just absolutely lose our minds and lose focus on what is reality, what is humanity, and what are we even doing. July 2nd, 2026 10:08 AM Alex Christy 295818 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/geoffrey-dickens/2026/07/02/hating-america-hollywood-lefts-worst-anti-american-outbursts This Independence Day weekend most Americans will be celebrating the freedoms and values that made this country so great. However, there are some in the Hollywood Left who would probably prefer to be partying, anywhere other than the USA.  For a class of people who owe their wealth and fame to the American way of life, it’s sad to see so many celebrities turning their back on their own country.  Over the years, the Media Research Center has caught celebrities attacking American symbols, traditions and blaming it for the world’s problems. The following is a countdown of the Hollywood Elite’s 16 Worst Anti-American Outbursts (as culled from the MRC’s archives):   16. Harvey Weinstein: America Is “Embarrassing”     “This is the only country in the world where we don’t have health care. Countries embarrass us around the world. And this is the only country in the world where we don’t have a gun law. I watched you, you know, talk about that. You know, quite frankly, it’s embarrassing. Obama is not embarrassing. The country is embarrassing.”— Movie producer Harvey Weinstein on CNN’s Piers Morgan Live, November 15, 2013.   15. Larry David on UFC Fight on White House Lawn: I Was Embarrassed to Be An American “It [UFC 250 fight on White House lawn] was a travesty. What else can you say about it? It was embarrassing. I was embarrassed to be an American.”— Comedian Larry David in a red carpet interview given to Variety, June 23.    14. If Americans Were Actually “Good,” They’d Drive Smaller Cars and Not Kill Iraqis for Oil Larry King: “We [Americans] try to do good, don’t we? I mean, we’re basically good.”Bill Maher: “No. Not for the rest of the world....Iraqis, I think, feel that if we drove smaller cars, maybe we wouldn’t have to kill them for their oil.”— Exchange on CNN’s Larry King Live, November 1, 2002.   13. Madonna Ponders Blowing Up the White House     “Yes, I am angry. Yes, I am outraged. Yes, I have thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House. But I know that this won’t change anything.”— Singer Madonna at the Women’s March as aired on C-SPAN, January 21, 2017.     12. Whoopi Goldberg: It’s Worse to Be Black in America Than Live in Iran   FLASHBACK: Co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin: “I think it’s very different to live in the United States in 2025 than it is in Iran.” Co-host Whoopi Goldberg: “Not if you’re black!” — ABC’s The View, June 18, 2025. pic.twitter.com/xPxZMB1X8D — Geoffrey Dickens (@GCDickens) July 1, 2026   Co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin: “I think it’s very different to live in the United States in 2025 than it is in Iran.”Co-host Whoopi Goldberg: “Not if you’re black!”— ABC’s The View, June 18, 2025.   11. America Already “Worst Abusers,” But “Twisted” Trump Has Made Us Worse  “We are already among the worst abusers of Human Rights on this earth. And we are inches away from being investigated by The Hague for our newly formed Fascist ways. All ths in the 510 days of his twisted regime.”— June 18, 2018 tweet by actor Ron Perlman.   10. Robert De Niro: How Can You “Love Our Country” Now?   Robert De Niro, speaking at the Resistance™ counterprogramming event, admitting he chokes on expressions of love for America. "I choke on that phrase, “we all love our country.” Because our country isn't so lovable right now. In the current climate, declaring love for our… pic.twitter.com/Df285ZOycx — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) February 25, 2026   “Tragically, we’re now in a country of by and for a handful of dishonest, greedy, and cruel authoritarians. So - love our country? Let me ask you: Can you love a country where our neighbors are shot down in the streets by masked government thugs? Can you love a country that denies healthcare for tens of millions of our fellow citizens? Can you love a country that ends contributions to sick and starving people around the world, causing hundreds of thousands of preventable deaths, many of them innocent children?...The bottom line is that I feel betrayed by my country.”— Actor Robert De Niro at Defiance.org’s “State of the Swamp” event, February 24, 2026.   9. American Flag Represents Racism and “Genocide” “It’s the same flag that flew over slavery and the genocide of the Native American population, the napalming of the Vietnamese children, the destruction of Afghanistan’s civilian hospitals and it’s on the uniform of every police officer who’s killed an innocent African-American person. It’s also a flag that’s in the courtroom of every judge who’s let those cops go free.”— Musician Tom Morello on HBO’s Real Time with Bill Maher, September 29, 2017.   8. Time to Replace Old Glory  “The Confederate battle flag, which was crafted as a symbol of opposition to the abolishment of slavery, is just recently tired. We don’t see it much anymore. However, on [January] 6th, when the stormers rained on the nation’s most precious hut, waving Old Glory — the memo was received: the American flag is its replacement….Like the Confederate, it is tattered, dated, divisive, and incorrect. It no longer represents democracy and freedom. It no longer represents ALL of us. It’s not fair to be forced to honor it.”— Singer Macy Gray in a June 17, 2021 column for MarketWatch.   7. National Anthem Is “Tough to Take”       Co-host Sara Haines: “To Representative Crenshaw, who says, you know, this is the basic thing of an Olympian, to represent the country, Gwen Berry is representing the country. She’s questioning an American anthem that maybe doesn’t represent all people in the country.”Co-host Whoopi Goldberg: “In the upcoming days, we’ll play you the American anthem and let you see what you think of it. Because there’s some stuff in there that makes it a little bit tough to take.”— Discussion about Olympian Gwen Barry protesting the National Anthem, ABC’s The View, June 29, 2021.   6. National Anthem is a Scam “To Get Boys and Girls to Go Kill People”     “We’re North Korea and we need to stand at a pledge of allegiance as war machines fly overhead for military recruiting videos….This anthem thing is a scam. This is not actually part of football. This was invented in 2009 from the government paying the NFL to market military recruitment, to get more people to go off and fight wars to die. This has nothing to do with NFL or the American pastime or tradition. This is to get boys and girls to go fly overseas and go kill people.”— Actor Jesse Williams on MSNBC Live with Thomas Roberts, September 24, 2017.   5. The United States of AmeriKKKa  “The so-called American cradle of democracy, that’s bullshit. The United States of America was built on the genocide of native people and slavery. That is the fabric of the United States of America. As my Brooklyn brother Jay-Z would say, facts.”— Film director Spike Lee discussing his new film BlacKkKlansman at the Cannes Film Festival, May 14, 2018 as reported by Vulture.   4. Singer’s Anti-American Remix of the National Anthem “Oh say can you see by the blood in the streets / That this place doesn’t smile on you colored child / Whose blood built this land with sweat and their hands / But we’ll die in this place and your memory erased / Oh say, does this truth hold any weight / This is not the land of the free, but the home of the slaves!”— Singer Jill Scott re-writing the lyrics to the National Anthem when she performed it at the Essence Festival, June 30, 2023.   Everyone please rise for the only National Anthem we will be recognizing from this day forward. Jill Scott, we thank you! #ESSENCEFest pic.twitter.com/WrYrP1nhTc — ESSENCE (@Essence) July 5, 2023   3. No More Pretending to “Support the Troops” “Stop saying, ‘I support the troops.’ I don’t. I used to....But at some point all individuals must answer for their actions, and now that we know our military leaders do things that have nothing to do with defending our lives, why would anyone sign up for this rogue organization?”— Leftwing filmmaker Michael Moore announcing his New Year’s resolutions in a December 31, 2012 article published by the Huffington Post.   2. Americans Are the Real “Terrorists”   FLASHBACK: “I just want to say something: 655,000 Iraqi civilians are dead. Who are the terrorists?...If you were in Iraq, and the other country, the United States, the richest in the world, invaded your country and killed 655,000 of your citizens, what would you call us?” —… pic.twitter.com/2QPaVvmJyn — Geoffrey Dickens (@GCDickens) July 1, 2026   “I just want to say something: 655,000 Iraqi civilians are dead. Who are the terrorists?...If you were in Iraq, and the other country, the United States, the richest in the world, invaded your country and killed 655,000 of your citizens, what would you call us?”— Co-host Rosie O’Donnell on ABC’s The View, May 17, 2007.   1. “We Have Been the Cowards”    FLASHBACK: “We have been the cowards. Lobbing cruise missiles from 2,000 miles away, that’s cowardly. Staying in the airplane when it hits the building, say what you want about it, not cowardly.” — Bill Maher on ABC’s Politically Incorrect, September 17, 2001. pic.twitter.com/rVahmAsvva — Geoffrey Dickens (@GCDickens) July 1, 2026   “We have been the cowards. Lobbing cruise missiles from 2,000 miles away, that’s cowardly. Staying in the airplane when it hits the building, say what you want about it, not cowardly.”— Bill Maher on ABC’s Politically Incorrect, September 17, 2001. July 2nd, 2026 10:00 AM Geoffrey Dickens 284866 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/catherine-mortensen/2026/07/02/todays-highlights-what-mrcs-media-watchdogs-are-saying MRC Watchdogs churn out breaking news on a daily basis. Don't miss Today's Highlights, where you can keep up with the top MRC content, whether it's the latest study on media bias, a glaring omission from the elitist media, or how the Big Tech companies are serving up the same leftist spin as the media.  Top Stories:   MRC Exposes the Hollywood Left’s Worst Anti-American Outbursts MRC Details How Politico Flubbed Gas Price Predictions After Attempting to Damage Republicans MRC Exposes the Media's Worst Historical and Modern Anti-American Outbursts MRC Catches NPR Legend Spreading Fake News About Justice Samuel Alito Retiring   MRC Exposes the Hollywood Left’s Worst Anti-American Outbursts The Hollywood elite frequently attack American symbols and traditions despite owing their extreme wealth and fame to the American way of life.  The MRC compiled a countdown of sixteen egregious anti-American outbursts from celebrity archives.  Famous actors and musicians have used public platforms to compare the United States to brutal regimes and label the American flag a symbol of genocide.  Celebrities continue to bash the national anthem and attack the country even as everyday citizens prepare to celebrate basic American freedoms.   MRC Details How Politico Flubbed Gas Price Predictions After Attempting to Damage Republicans Politico previously cited energy experts to confidently predict a massive surge in summer gasoline prices following the outbreak of the Iran war.  Crude oil and pump prices plummeted precipitously instead of spiraling upward after a fragile truce was reached.  Politico reporters expressed disappointment that the drop in gas prices would actually improve Republican prospects in the upcoming midterm elections.  The MRC continues to track how mainstream media outlets actively hope for economic pain to serve their own political narratives.   MRC Exposes the Media's Worst Historical and Modern Anti-American Outbursts MRC archives document numerous instances of mainstream journalists actively ridiculing and deriding the United States.  Prominent liberal commentators have used major public platforms to label America a sick and inherently racist nation founded on slavery.  Multiple media figures have openly expressed embarrassment over the national anthem and asserted that flying the American flag represents jingoism or intolerance.  Left wing journalists have gone so far as to call the United States Constitution a piece of crap and argue that the American Revolution was a mistake.   MRC Catches NPR Legend Spreading Fake News About Justice Samuel Alito Retiring National Public Radio legal reporter Nina Totenberg falsely reported on air and online that Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito was retiring.  The veteran reporter failed to perform basic journalism by rushing to publish a prewritten analysis without calling Alito's office to confirm the rumor.  The public editor of the network admitted that a rookie reporter would have been fired for committing such an elementary and reckless professional mistake.  This major reporting failure highlights how the taxpayer funded network functions as a thoroughly ideological outlet led by biased journalists.         July 2nd, 2026 5:30 AM Catherine Mortensen 293155 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/jorge-bonilla/2026/07/02/elitist-media-silent-minnesota-pardons-violent-sexual-predator The partisan nature of the Elitist Media’s news coverage even trickles down to how pardons are covered. Any pardon issued by President Donald Trump will immediately raise the media’s hackles and draw significant coverage. Controversial pardons by Democrats? Not so much. Per The New York Post: Minnesota officials, including Democrat Gov. Tim Walz, last month pardoned an illegal immigrant who was previously convicted of sexually assaulting a 10-year-old girl and who was slated to be deported. With the recommendation of the Minnesota Clemency Review Commission (CRC), the Minnesota Board of Pardons — led by Walz, state Attorney General Keith Ellison and state Chief Justice Natalie Hudson — granted a pardon for Laos national Tou Lue Vang, 42, at its June 10 meeting, according to a letter informing Vang of the decision from Carli Stark, the executive director of the state CRC. The pardon essentially gives Vang a clean slate. “Being granted a pardon is a notable achievement and a reflection of the work you have done since your conviction,” Stark wrote in her letter to Vang. The article goes on to note that the defendant admitted to having the sexual contact with a minor, and blamed his crimes on the cultural norms of his native Thailand. Furthermore, he was detained last year as part of the Trump administration’s enforcement operations in Minnesota. In other words, this is the type of criminal immigrant that we were told needed to be removed from the streets- the worst of the worst. Instead, a clemency commission that includes the 2024 Democrat vice presidential nominee decides to pardon him so that he can avoid deportation. Needless to say, a Trump pardon under similar circumstances would have drawn significant A-block time.  There was no mention of this pardon on the Elitist Media evening news, or on its cable news networks. Instead, viewers were regaled with endless coverage of the Taylor Swift-Travis Kelce wedding at Madison Square Garden. There was time for this and for other things but, to put a fine point on it, zero time for the pardon of a convicted violent sexual predator so that he may avoid deportation from the United States. We are reminded yet again that what doesn’t get covered on the Elitist Media evening news is often more important than what does.   July 2nd, 2026 12:33 AM Jorge Bonilla 295817 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/regan-keefer/2026/07/01/dan-schneider-mrcs-petition-fcc-block-renewal-abc-owned-licenses MRC Free Speech America Vice President, Dan Schneider, joined Rob Schmitt Tonight on Newsmax on Tuesday evening to discuss why the Media Research Center decided to petition the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to block the renewal of ABC-Owned Broadcast Licenses.  FCC Chairman Brendan Carr is reviewing eight of ABC’s broadcasting licenses, accusing it of running a “campaign of misinformation,” and is investigating whether ABC’s The View should be required to offer equal airtime to guests of the opposing political party.  Schneider explains why ABC must lose its licenses: “If you're in broadcast, then you are required by law to provide equal time to opponents and to serve the public interest. And that does not mean just the anti-Trump segment of the public, but the whole public. If ABC does not want to comply with the law, then it can go to cable. It can do streaming, it can have print, but it cannot continue to take our government-issued...licenses.” Free access to the public airwaves comes with an obligation to serve the public interest. If ABC does not want to comply with the law, then it can go to cable or streaming. It cannot continue to take our government-issued licenses.@Schneider_DC @SchmittNYC @NEWSMAX pic.twitter.com/Xll7yKAPAd — Media Research Center (@theMRC) July 2, 2026 He quotes Joy Behar from The View: “‘As long as Republicans are in power in the majority, there will never be accountability. You have to vote for Democrats.’” Quotes such as this simply do not serve the public interest; they serve, as Schneider puts it, the “anti-Trump segment of the public.”  Broadcast TV comes with rules because it is a privilege to use those airwaves, not a right. ABC should be serving the public interest, not campaigning for Democrats. @Schneider_DC @SchmittNYC @NEWSMAX pic.twitter.com/vO2McTA8gf — Media Research Center (@theMRC) July 1, 2026 Schneider concluded by stating that if Behar were on MS NOW or another cable provider, she could make biased statements like these, but broadcast TV has specific regulations, and if these regulations are broken, they must be held accountable. Watch the full segment below:   July 1st, 2026 8:15 PM Regan Keefer 295815 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/nicholas-spinnato/2026/07/01/ms-now-leftist-dsa-european-social-democracy-not-soviet On Wednesday’s Morning Joe, as left-wing cable networks continued to be forced to cover the rise of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) due to their continued wins in Democratic primaries, guest Anand Giridharadas, an online newsletter publisher, downplayed concerns of the DSA having radical ideologies. He asserted the DSA was like to “left, center-left ideology in most European countries,” and it was not “gulag socialism” or “Soviet Union Socialism.” Co-host Willie Geist turned to Giridharadas in the aftermath of another DSA-candidate victory, this time in Colorado. Geist wondered: “But is this a bigger movement for the Democrats? Is it a problem for Democrats nationally because Republicans are going to use this - some believe extreme views of some of these candidates - against them nationally?” Giridharadas followed Geist and connected the socialist rise “to the kind of oligarchic power that we see being exercised in Washington.” After he praised the “broad and diverse” nature of the country, he said “often” most people in the DSA “are of working-class who have lived the struggles of most people and are not the kind of millionaires or typical in Congress.”   On Wednesday, Morning Joe Guest Anand Giridharadas said the DSA has a "left, center-left ideology" like European Social Democracies, as he then told viewers that the rise of the DSA comes from those who "didn't grow up with the baggage of the Cold War." pic.twitter.com/NjeTGVpmav — Nick (@nspin310) July 1, 2026   He then started to talk about socialism, and said the story was less about Americans “becoming socialist: and more about how they “didn’t grow up with the baggage of the Cold War”: I think it is actually a new generation of people in this country didn't grow up with the baggage of the Cold War, didn't grow up with, like, bomb shelter drills in the Cold War. And so when they hear socialism, they're not thinking about, you know, a Red Scare of a Soviet Union overloading the world, which if you're of a certain age, that was the fear that you were that you were told. After Giridharadas minimized the Soviet Union and the Red Scare, which he labeled as “the fear that you were told,” he continued to say the DSA would be a simple “social Democracy” like a “left, center-left” ideology in European countries. He explained: Democratic socialism is social democracy, which is essentially the left, center-left ideology in most European countries, which is basically we can have nice things, right? He then assured viewers the DSA was just so “we can have nice things” and was definitely not like the Soviet Union: This is not gulag socialism. This is not the Soviet Union socialism. This is like buses should be free, housing should be affordable. People shouldn't die of preventable illnesses because they don't have the right health care plan. Not helping Girdihadas' claims, one DSA candidate, Darializa Avila Chevalier, has showcased some communist affinities, which include complaints that a bookstore did not showcase The Complete Works of J.V. Stalin in its banned book section. Chevalier also, according to the New York Post, “called for government-run farm cooperatives, reminiscent of the farm programs of Stalin and Mao.” For a party, the DSA, that Giridharadas tried to assure did not emulate “Soviet Union socialism,” some candidates and influential DSA-aligned streamer Hasan Piker, who has worn outfits that look suspiciously like Mao and showed glee when gifted Mao’s Little Red Book, sure seemed like they had an affinity for Soviet-style governing systems. The transcript is below. Click "expand": MS NOW’s Morning Joe July 1, 2026 6:46:31 AM Eastern (...) WILLIE GIEST: Anand, if you put this together in Colorado with what happened last week in New York City, what do you see? Are these just specific to these districts? Not terribly surprising that a very Progressive candidate would win in some of the places that we've seen. But is this a bigger movement for the Democrats? Is it a problem for Democrats nationally because Republicans are going to use this, some believe extreme views of some of these candidates, against them nationally? ANAND GIRIDHARADAS: Well, Willie, you're on a roll with stringing these stories together. I mean, you were just we were just before the break talking about the president using the American presidency as a vehicle to profit from crypto and other things and making a billion-plus dollars on it. And then you have people saying, “Why are Democratic socialists winning in different parts of the country?” Well, it may be as a reaction to the kind of oligarchic power that we see being exercised in Washington.  And I think, you know, it's very important to understand in a country like this that is broad and diverse, and if you drive an hour, you can get to a whole new kind of religious worldview, ideological worldview, relationship to land and space. This is a diverse, big country. So, it's not going to be a uniform thing, but something is happening, and I think it is fresh faces. It is people, often in this wave, who are of working-class backgrounds, who have lived the struggles of most people and are not the kind of millionaires or typical in Congress.  It is young people, in addition to just the ideological aspect. But the ideological story is important. And I think what is happening above all is less than Americans are, you know, becoming socialist.  I think it is actually a new generation of people in this country didn't grow up with the baggage of the Cold War, didn't grow up with, like, bomb shelter drills in the Cold War. And so when they hear socialism, they're not thinking about, you know, a Red Scare of a Soviet Union overloading the world, which if you're of a certain age, that was the fear that you were told. If you're 25, in which a lot of these voters are electing these candidates in a lot of places, what you understand, I think rightly, is like social democracy, right? Democratic socialism is social democracy, which is essentially the left, center-left ideology in most European countries, which is basically we can have nice things, right?  This is not gulag socialism. This is not the Soviet Union socialism. This is like buses should be free, housing should be affordable. People shouldn't die of preventable illnesses because they don't have the right health care plan. And I think it makes sense that in an age of the first trillionaire in this country and a billionaire president fleecing us through elected office, that you see people who present a different story winning. (...) July 1st, 2026 8:03 PM Nicholas Spinnato 295812 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/steve-malzberg/2026/07/01/cnns-kasie-hunt-its-2020-obsessed-trumps-fault-they-cant-pass On Monday, The Supreme Court handed down several rulings, one of which went in favor of President Trump, expanding his power to fire the heads of Federal agencies, but several others went against him, including one which allows mail-in ballots to arrive after election day and be counted. This decision caused the President to double down on pushing the Save America Act, which became a topic of discussion on Monday's The Arena, on CNN, where Trump was bashed, and the very sanctity of our elections was glossed over. Host Kasie Hunt turned to CNN Special Correspondent Jamie Gangel, who proceeded to downplay any concern over delaying election results, and of course, went after Trump. GANGEL: For perspective, does it take a while to count ballots in certain places? Yes. If they're coming in after election day, can it extend it longer? Is it a little messy? Yes.... It's not about corruption or fraud.... So is this a loss for President Trump? Yes. But big picture, he's obsessed with this. It is sort of a loss of his own making because the underlying problem here is he doesn't want to admit he lost in 2020. So he's looking for fraud and corruption where there isn't. Liberals can always say Trump's losses can be blamed on Trump. Hunt then played a clip of Trump who was asked if he'd sign the housing bill. TRUMP CLIP: It hasn't been sent to me yet....It's a yawn. Some people say it's wonderful. Compared to the SAVE America Act, just about everything is a big yawn. After mockingly repeating Trump's "big yawn" description, Hunt welcomed in former Trump White House Deputy Press Secretary Hogan Gidley, who she would almost immediately interrupt. HUNT: The President calls it a big yawn....Why not take the political win on housing under these circumstances? GIDLEY: I think he is going to take the victory lap in some form or fashion. I do think, though, he is focused on making sure that our elections have some semblance of faith, trust and confidence, which they have been losing now in this country for decades. You remember around 65% of Republicans did not believe that Joe Biden won the election, but around 60- HUNT: Isn't that President Trump's fault? GIDLEY: But around 63 percent of -- HUNT: Didn't he tell them that he -- (Hunt laughs) GIDLEY: But around 63 percent of Democrats did not believe that Donald Trump beat Hillary Clinton. People have been complaining about this process for a long time. Gidley continued, addressing Gangel's claim that Trump was "obsessed" and then turned his attention to the SAVE Act, which would require voter ID, and prevent voter fraud, something that Hunt didn't seem to have much interest in. GIDLEY: He is not obsessed with this. GANGEL: Yes. [Laughter] GIDLEY: Unless you consider obsessed with 90 percent of the country, which also agrees only American citizens should decide the outcome of American elections. HUNT: But that's already a law. GIDLEY: I don't get to vote in Italy, I don't get to vote in Germany or France, and I'm sure you don't either. Only in this country -- HUNT: It's also the law, Hogan- GIDLEY: Well, it's also the law you can't come into this country illegally, but yet people do it all the time. It's also the law you can't murder somebody, yet murder happens in big cities all the time. So, to pretend as though just because it's a law, it doesn't happen is ridiculous. It happens constantly. HUNT: The Heritage Foundation is the one that has studied this,  between someone voting when they're not a citizen and the number of votes required to change the outcome of an election. GIDLEY: Sure, but how many -- how many instances of fraud are okay? Is it one? A hundred? HUNT: I'm not arguing instances of fraud are okay. The question is, can we trust or not the results of our elections. And it's required for us -- GIDLEY: No question. And on both sides, people don't trust it. That's just the statistics. Not sure why Hunt would bring up The Heritage Foundation's study on voter fraud, which noted, among other things, "In 2015, a city council election in the New Jersey town of Perth Amboy was decided by a mere 10 votes. A judge overturned the election and ordered a new one after it was revealed that at least 13 illegal absentee ballots had been cast." Hunt then outrageously allowed Democratic Strategist  Adrienne Elrod,  to go unchallenged while claiming that Trump is, "actively trying to disenfranchise voters." Unfortunately, it was consistent with the entire segment. July 1st, 2026 6:00 PM Steve Malzberg 295799 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/business/joseph-vazquez/2026/07/01/elon-musk-tears-apart-utter-piece-sht-nicholas-kristof The world’s richest man has had enough of anti-Israel fake news peddler and New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof for continuing to spew sewage on the internet with impunity. Kristof attempted to play gotcha! against SpaceX CEO Elon Musk by making a post-hoc argument to illustrate how the first trillionaire supposedly “killed” people by taking a blowtorch to the massive government waste replete throughout federal agencies. “Elon, I can give you many, many names of people who have died because of your aid cuts,” Kristof snorted in a June 28 X post. He then cherry picked a few random names and then arbitrarily shoe-horned Musk's DOGE cuts as being the culprit behind their deaths: “Yamah Freeman was a 23-year-old woman who died in childbirth because you stopped paying for the diesel for ambulances in her part of Liberia. I talked to her parents and sister in their village.” As NewsBusters Media Editor Bill D’Agostino suggested in retort, this is as idiotic as saying Musk could be blamed for a kid dying in Tajikistan from toxoplasmosis because he stopped paying for his Mucinex. Musk had a one-line response to Kristof’s nonsense: “You’re an utter piece of shit and a liar.”  Manhattan Institute senior fellow Christopher Rufo piled on the mockery: “The moral calculus here is insane. According to Kristof, the USA is responsible for every poor nation in the entire world. If an ambulance runs out of fuel in rural Liberia, that is our fault. The liberal has a pathological tension between the feelings of omnipotence and guilt.” Using Kristof’s logic, the Trump administration putting a freeze on $8 million for the African Elephant Conservation Fund means he would be liable if the world’s largest pachyderms eventually experience a thinning of the population.  You’re an utter piece of shit and a liar — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 30, 2026 What made it worse for Kristof was that he tried doubling down on his argument a day later, making himself look even more foolish in the process and teeing him up to get swatted down by Musk: No, I don't think we are responsible for all poor nations. But we were saving 1 life every 10 seconds with USAID, and we cut that off abruptly with no time for countries to adjust. So kids died unnecessarily. And I do think that it's bad when kids die unnecessarily, don't you? Of course, there’s absolutely zero way for Kristof to know if we were in fact saving “1 life every 10 seconds with USAID,” given the litany of chain of custody issues and lack of oversight that has become damningly commonplace with foreign aid. As South Africa’s Mail & Guardian newspaper reported January 30, despite the U.S. giving $200 billion in foreign assistance to Africa since 1991, “African countries lose an estimated $88 billion each year through tax evasion, money laundering and corruption.” The USAID Inspector General Adam Kaplan even admitted in a March 17 statement to the House House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight and Intelligence that “Foreign assistance programs, no matter which agency administers them, are targets for fraud, corruption, and diversion to terrorist organizations.”  Musk addressing these significant issues is apparently tantamount to killing people, according to Kristof. Kristof clearly didn’t think this correlation vs. causation argument through at all. But what more can you expect from the same moron who actually tried convincing the world through garbage journalism that the Israeli Defense Forces were teaching dogs to rape Palestinian prisoners? Here’s a suggestion for Kristof: Just because you have a social media account doesn’t mean you have to post every lowbrow thing that pops into your brain.  July 1st, 2026 4:22 PM Joseph Vazquez 295811 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/business/pj-gladnick/2026/07/01/politico-oops-experts-and-us-wrong-higher-gas-prices Ooops! What we predicted about higher gas prices a couple of months ago... Never mind!  On April 28, Politico White House reporter Scott Waldman along with his sidekick, Eli Stokols, were confidently citing experts who predicted a big surge in gasoline prices due to the Iran war as you can see in "‘There’s a day of reckoning coming’: Energy experts expect another spike at the pump." Energy experts say another oil price spike is coming — and it may be made worse by the president’s social media posts. President Donald Trump has repeatedly spurred temporary dips in oil prices by claiming on Truth Social that the Iran war is near an end and that U.S. oil production would ensure sky high gas prices would soon retreat. The jawboning has mostly worked. Even as the global price of oil has crept up over $100 per barrel on the futures market, it is significantly less than the $140 per barrel spot price, or what it would take to buy a barrel today. But the president’s promises can only work for so long. Supply of oil — especially in Europe and Asia — is dwindling and a price shock is coming, said Dan Pickering, chief investment officer at Pickering Energy Partners. He said that when the summer driving season begins there will be another gas price shock that “hits people in the face.” “There’s a day of reckoning coming,” he said. “It will be painful because I can tell you that the stock market’s ignoring this.” Well, two months later and it appears that the "day of reckoning" is fading away as petroleum and gasoline prices continue declining.. From a high in April of $112 per barrel of crude oil that price has plunged over $40 to the current price of just over $70 per barrel with the price of gasoline also declining and expected to lower even more. To Waldman's credit, he acknowledged the erroneous predictions of April on Tuesday in "Energy experts said gas prices would stay high. Why were they wrong?" Gasoline prices have fallen precipitously since the U.S. and Iran began their fragile truce, defying expert predictions of a long summer slog with sky-high prices. Instead of spiraling upward, the average price at the pump has plummeted 70 cents per gallon in a month from a peak of $4.56. A little over a week since the memorandum of understanding was signed between the countries, a barrel of oil costs just a little more than it did before the U.S. and Israel bombed Iran in late February. It wasn’t supposed to work this way, according to energy experts whose predictions of $150 barrel of oil, $5 gasoline and summer recessions were widely quoted in the media, including POLITICO. Unsurprisingly, since this is Politico after all, Waldman seemed a bit bummed out that the lower than expected gas prices at the pump could improve the GOP election prospects in the midterm elections. The falling prices are a huge win for the president and his party, helping to blunt an easy Democratic attack line ahead of the upcoming midterms in which voters say they are hyperfocused on the cost-of-living. While voters may never forgive the spike, many political prognosticators thought it was going to be much worse. If the current prices hold, the midterms may not be quite as catastrophic for Trump and Republicans in November, said Frank Luntz, the veteran Republican pollster. But he said the deadline for easing voter anxiety over affordability is essentially now. That’s because voter attitudes are locked in by August, which means that further price drops in September and October are likely less meaningful. Hmmm... So does that mean Scott Waldman and much of the rest of the Politico staff will be furiously rubbing their worry beads in August while gazing fixatedly at the prices on the gas pumps? July 1st, 2026 3:28 PM P.J. Gladnick 295784 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/cnsnews/craig-bannister/2026/07/01/dour-democrats-drag-down-american-pride-gallup-survey With the exception of increasingly dour Democrats, adult Americans’ pride in their country is holding steady as the nation nears the 250th anniversary of its founding, results of a new Gallup poll reveal. In a national survey of U.S. adults (18+), conducted June 1-15, 93% of Republicans and 51% of Independents said they were either “extremely” or “very” proud to be an American, on par with the 92% of Republicans and 53% of Independents who voiced such pride in June of last year. Among Democrats, however, those expressing similar pride in being American fell to 27%, down from 36% last year – when it plummeted 26 percentage points from 2024, as Gallup noted in its 2025 report: “Democrats are mostly responsible for the drop in U.S. pride this year (2025), with 36% saying they are extremely or very proud, down from 62% a year ago. This is only the second time Democrats’ pride has fallen below the majority level, along with a 42% reading in 2020, the last year of the first Trump administration. That poll was conducted during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic and shortly after the murder of George Floyd by Minneapolis police officers.” Overall in 2026, 58% of U.S. adults reported they were either extremely or very proud to be an America, down from 53% in 2025, as the decline in those with “extreme” pride (from 41% to 33%) was partially offset by an increase in adults who said they were “very” proud (from 17% to 20%). Among Independents, those who said they were very proud inched up from 21% to 23%, but those who said they were extremely proud Americans fell more, from 32% to 28%. This year’s 56-point gap between the 70% of Republicans who said they were “extremely” proud to be American and the 14% of Democrats who felt the same rivals the record 57-point difference in 2025. Republicans (69%) are also far more likely than Democrats (26%) to express national pride by displaying the American flag outside their homes on national holidays or other days during the year, Gallup found. Among Independents, 42% reported that they fly the American flag. Both Republicans and Independents are more likely to fly the flag today than they were 40 years ago, while Democrats are less inclined to do so, Gallup notes. In 1986, 50% of Republicans, 42% of Democrats and 36% of Independents said they flew the flag outside their homes. July 1st, 2026 3:05 PM Craig Bannister 295813 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/brad-wilmouth/2026/07/01/ms-nows-soboroff-plugs-lefty-singer-who-trashes-conservative On Sunday's Connect show, MS NOW host Jacob Soboroff devoted a segment to left-wing country singer Bryan Andrews, played a clip of him ranting against ICE, and allowed him to use his time on air to excoriate conservative Christians for supporting ICE. Early on in the interview, Soboroff set up the clip: "I want to play, if it's okay, a little bit of one of your videos about ICE's immigration crackdown -- something that I cover a lot for for our network. This went viral. Let's let's listen to that real quick." Then came a soundbite of Andrews shouting: Soboroff Plugs Lefty Singer Who Trashes Conservative Christians pic.twitter.com/WzahjpULbO — Brad Wilmouth (@bradwilmouth) June 29, 2026 I got to sit here and listen to you all call yourselves Christians! Bulls***! You don't get to call yourself a Christian and then advocate and laugh when families are torn apart outside of courthouses, of people trying to come here the right ways! You don't get to call yourself a Christian and then think it's okay that the highest court in the f***ing land just gave a green light to ICE agents to be able to f***ing target people because they are brown or speaking Spanish! No fact checks were performed. The MS NOW host then hinted at his guest being a left-wing Christian as he followed up: SOBOROFF: You're a deeply faithful person. ANDREWS: Yeah. SOBOROFF: How do you -- how do you navigate these kind of conversations when you're talking to neighbors who -- who go to the exact same church that you do on Sunday morning, but vote for the policies that you are railing against there? The liberal singer then admitted that he no longer thinks of himself as a Christian. So much for that "deeply faithful person" stuff: ANDREWS: Yeah. I mean, to be honest with you, I haven't been to church in a long time because of that. You know what I'm saying? Like that's the, but I -- I think that that's where, for me, maybe I've stopped calling myself a Christian because, I mean -- SOBOROFF: Wow. ANDREWS: -- I don't -- I don't support that. And I will never -- I will never, ever understand how somebody can look and read a Bible about a man who was so loving and treated people with respect and love and dignity, no matter where they came from or who they are or what they look like, condoning this stuff because I'm just -- I'm sorry. Andrews added: Look, in the Texas state board of education case that we've just seen, you know, where they just said that now we're going to, in the state of Texas, make it mandatory curriculum for students to read the Bible or parts of the Bible. If you have to force-feed Christianity to children, it was never, ever about you wanting kids to find Jesus or to find their faith or anything like that. It was always about control. And if your Jesus condones that, that's not my Jesus. Transcript follows: JACOB SOBOROFF: I want to play, if it's okay, a little bit of one of your videos about ICE's immigration crackdown -- something that I cover a lot for for our network. This went viral. Let's let's listen to that real quick. BRYAN ANDREWS, COUNTRY SINGER: Yeah. ANDREWS (shouting in a recording): I got to sit here and listen to you all call yourselves Christians! Bulls***! You don't get to call yourself a Christian and then advocate and laugh when families are torn apart outside of courthouses, of people trying to come here the right ways! You don't get to call yourself a Christian and then think it's okay that the highest court in the f***ing land just gave a green light to ICE agents to be able to f***ing target people because they are brown or speaking Spanish! SOBOROFF: You're a deeply faithful person. ANDREWS: Yeah. SOBOROFF: How do you -- how do you navigate these kind of conversations when you're talking to neighbors who -- who go to the exact same church that you do on Sunday morning, but vote for the policies that you are railing against there? ANDREWS: Yeah. I mean, to be honest with you, I haven't been to church in a long time because of that. You know what I'm saying? Like that's the, but I -- I think that that's where, for me, maybe I've stopped calling myself a Christian because, I mean -- SOBOROFF: Wow. ANDREWS: -- I don't -- I don't support that. And I will never -- I will never, ever understand how somebody can look and read a Bible about a man who was so loving and treated people with respect and love and dignity, no matter where they came from or who they are or what they look like, condoning this stuff because I'm just -- I'm sorry. I hate to -- I mean, we watch it -- look, in the Texas state board of education case that we've just seen, you know, where they just said that now we're going to, in the state of Texas, make it mandatory curriculum for students to read the Bible or parts of the Bible. If you have to force feed Christianity to children, it was never, ever about you wanting kids to find Jesus or to find their faith or anything like that. It was always about control. And if your Jesus condones that, that's not my Jesus. July 1st, 2026 1:48 PM Brad Wilmouth 295774 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/curtis-houck/2026/07/01/lame-paula-reid-set-quit-cnn-ms-now-wouldnt-work-ellisons-weiss First reported late Tuesday by Status’s Oliver Darcy and the so-called media reporting class, liberal journalist Paula Reid is set to quit her job “in a few months” as CNN chief legal affairs correspondent because of “concerns” and she has about Paramount Skydance’s pending merger with Warner Bros. Discovery and, thus, has exhibited “discomfort” at working for those dirty, supposed MAGA TV tycoons in David Ellison and Bari Weiss. Another shoe dropped Wednesday as Variety’s Brian Steinberg scooped that Reid would be taking her biased, partisan talents over to MS NOW for a similar position. Darcy gushed his former colleague (which he didn’t care to mention) “was everywhere across CNN’s programming” on Tuesday amid the final day of Supreme Court opinions, exhibiting why she’s been “one of the network’s most trusted legal voices and guiding audiences through the legal battles and constitutional questions ignited by the Trump administration.” But alas, he shared “ the 43-year-old star correspondent” has chosen not to renew her contract because of “candid conversations with CNN executives in which she has raised concerns about Paramount's pending $111 billion acquisition of CNN parentco Warner Bros. Discovery” and “discomfort with the takeover and the uncertainty it has cast over CNN's future.” It was her Darcy made the connection to Reid’s job prior to CNN: Reid spent a decade at CBS News where she began her career as an on-air correspondent for the “CBS Evening News” anchored by Scott Pelley. I’m told she has privately expressed concern about the sweeping changes implemented at the network since Ellison took over. “Ultimately, Reid decided the uncertainty surrounding the merger was too great and I’m told that she concluded it wasn’t worth rolling the dice on an organization facing such an unsettled future,” he insisted, which revealed the thin-skinned, viewpoint-averse nature of so many of these partisan tools, Reid included. Along with a public declaration from CNN documentary host Kara Swisher and a reported promise from AC360 host Anderson Cooper, Darcy predicted Reid “is unlike to be the last” CNN journalist to quit the network because of their refusal to work for the Ellisons and/or with Weiss. Darcy said “a number of other journalists at the network are privately weighing their future” because “many...have watched in horror as Ellison has allowed Weiss to upend CBS News and have little interest in working under her.” Yet again, these liberal hacks are acting as though Weiss moving a network two ticks to the center (while keeping much of the same, liberal themes in its reporting) as though it were a war crime. Steinberg’s framing of Reid’s MS NOW move was comical, posing it as some bastion of journalism in contrast to Weiss’s CBS: “MS NOW, meanwhile, has put a stronger emphasis on harder news and enterprise journalism under its president, Rebecca Kutler.” Back during said CBS days, Reid most infamously made herself the center of the D.C. press corps universe whenever she’d spar in 2020 with then-White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany. On one such occasion, McEnany schooled her by demanding “we’re not having a debate on a cable news channel right now.” And a few weeks prior, Reid set off another tussle with McEnany by declaring Trump had “intentionally misle[d] the American people” about the deadly nature of the coronavirus. During the same election period, she helped CBS News dismiss Hunter Biden’s laptop outright and suggest it might be entirely made up by nefarious actors. Shifting to her CNN days, Reid has been a reliable D.C. liberal. Whether it’s insisting democracy was being undermined because Fani Willis was taken to court for sleeping with one of her fellow prosecutors, stating reporters were crying over Trump’s first attorney general pick, describing Jimmy Carter as “courageous” in the hostage crisis, or defending transgenderism, Reid will feel right at home on MS NOW where she doesn’t have to acknowledge the fair and legitimate existence of tens of millions outside her political bubble. July 1st, 2026 12:54 PM Curtis Houck 295810 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/alex-christy/2026/07/01/psaki-sets-naacp-warn-suicides-after-scotus-trans-sports-ruling MS NOW host Jen Psaki welcomed NAACP general counsel Kristen Clarke to Tuesday’s edition of The Briefing to help her make sense of the day’s Supreme Court rulings. When it came to the ruling that upheld state laws prohibiting males from competing in women’s sports, Clarke not-so subtly suggested the ruling would contribute to “high rates of suicide and depression.” Psaki led Clarke by wondering if there was some darker and more sinister plot at work in the Court’s ruling, “Do you—one of the things I've seen out there from some legal experts, but I'm interested in your view, is that this is a—it's not just about this, that this is a slippery slope to potentially go after, you know, something more expansive, the ability, you know, against discrimination of any kind based on gender. What do you think? Is this a slippery slope to a larger objective and goal? What should we be clear-eyed about here?”   Jen Psaki asks NAACP legal counsel Kristen Clarke about the Supreme Court's transgender sports ruling,"What do you think? Is this a slippery slope to a larger objective and goal? What should we be clear-eyed about here?" Clarke claims the ruling was a "awfully, terribly, a… pic.twitter.com/kwsMItnJgZ — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) July 1, 2026   Clarke responded by trying to guilt-trip the Court’s conservatives and presumably anyone else who does not want males in female sports, “I mean, what a great ruling on birthright citizenship, but no doubt the transgender sports question that went before the Court came out awfully, terribly, a tremendous setback for the LGTBQ movement in our country, and I think about transgender children who suffer from high rates of suicide and depression and simply want the ability to participate like all other kids.” Switching topics, Clarke added, “I do think that civil—our civil rights statue and the architecture of our Civil Rights Movement is unraveling quickly. This Trump administration has, you know, turned the clock back when it comes to enforcement of our federal civil rights. I used to lead the Civil Rights Division, which is nothing more than a shadow of its former self. And we have a Court now that is expressing tremendous hostility to civil rights, especially when it comes to voting rights, right?” She also claimed, “The Calais decision is one of the most consequential and devastating decisions of this Supreme Court term. So, I think it's important that we be vigilant in terms of the work that lies ahead. It's why I think that as we have this conversation, we need to also be talking about the need for Supreme Court reform, the need to figure out how we restore independence and fairness to the Court.” Despite just praising the birthright citizenship case as a “great ruling,” Clarke claimed “we” need to talk about reforming the Court because it just isn’t neutral, “We need to be talking about term limits, a ban on the shadow docket, and a way to ensure that the Supreme Court is once again a neutral place, so that when these questions about constitutional interpretation and about our civil rights laws and how they should be interpreted and applied go before those nine justices, we can have confidence that we're getting a fair, a fair outcome.” By "neutral," Clarke really means “a Supreme Court that agrees with me.” Outcomes she agrees with are “great,” but are to be quickly forgotten as outcomes she doesn’t like are supposedly leading to suicide and depression. Here is a transcript for the June 30 show: MS NOW The Briefing with Jen Psaki 6/30/2026 9:16 PM ET JEN PSAKI: Do you—one of the things I've seen out there from some legal experts, but I'm interested in your view, is that this is a—it's not just about this, that this is a slippery slope to potentially go after, you know, something more expansive, the ability, you know, against discrimination of any kind based on gender. What do you think? Is this a slippery slope to a larger objective and goal? What should we be clear-eyed about here? KRISTEN CLARKE: Yeah. Yeah. I mean, what a great ruling on birthright citizenship, but no doubt the transgender sports question that went before the Court came out awfully, terribly, a tremendous setback for the LGTBQ movement in our country, and I think about transgender children who suffer from high rates of suicide and depression and simply want the ability to participate like all other kids. I do think that civil—our civil rights statue and the architecture of our Civil Rights Movement is unraveling quickly. This Trump administration has, you know, turned the clock back when it comes to enforcement of our federal civil rights. I used to lead the Civil Rights Division, which is nothing more than a shadow of its former self. And we have a Court now that is expressing tremendous hostility to civil rights, especially when it comes to voting rights, right? The Calais decision is one of the most consequential and devastating decisions of this Supreme Court term. So, I think it's important that we be vigilant in terms of the work that lies ahead. It's why I think that as we have this conversation, we need to also be talking about the need for Supreme Court reform, the need to figure out how we restore independence and fairness to the Court. We need to be talking about term limits, a ban on the shadow docket, and a way to ensure that the Supreme Court is once again a neutral place, so that when these questions about constitutional interpretation and about our civil rights laws and how they should be interpreted and applied go before those nine justices, we can have confidence that we're getting a fair, a fair outcome. July 1st, 2026 12:24 PM Alex Christy 295809 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/nicholas-fondacaro/2026/07/01/fired-cnn-reporter-lands-al-jazeera-after-defaming-navy After blowing in the wind for over a year since CNN fired him, disgraced former chief national security correspondent Alex Marquardt finally found a landing place. He apparently didn’t think he could cut it on his own on Substack, like many other displaced liberal “journalists,” and decided to answer the call from Al Jazeera English. A fitting home for the reporter who authored the video report that resulted in CNN being found liable for the malicious defamation of Navy veteran Zachary Young. “I’m very excited to be joining Al Jazeera @AJEnglish in Washington after years of watching their extraordinary coverage from around the world,” Marquardt boasted. Not only was he joining the network that literally backs jihadist terrorists and takes part in their operations, Marquardt would be hosting their coverage of America’s 250th birthday. “Kicking things off today with the US 250th coverage and will be hosting “This is America,” every day at 2:30pm ET. Hope you’ll tune in!” he added.   I’m very excited to be joining Al Jazeera @AJEnglish in Washington after years of watching their extraordinary coverage from around the world. Kicking things off today with the US 250th coverage and will be hosting “This is America,” every day at 2:30pm ET. Hope you’ll tune in! — Alex Marquardt (@MarquardtA) July 1, 2026   In an accidental example of just how good of a match his hiring was, following the link to Al Jazeera English’s X account, provided by Marquardt, it featured a banner promoting their documentary that pushed the conspiracy theory that the Israeli Defense Force trained dogs to rape Palestinians. It was over a year ago, June 2, 2025, that Marquardt cryptically announced on X that he was abruptly leaving CNN: Some personal news: I’m leaving CNN after 8 terrific years. Tough to say goodbye but it’s been an honor to work among the very best in the business. Profound thank you to my comrades on the National Security team & the phenomenal teammates I’ve worked with in the US and abroad. It was later confirmed by former CNN insider Oliver Darcy that Marquardt was fired as a result of CNN being found liable for malicious defamation earlier in the year, and costing the network several million dollars. CNN parent company Warner Brothers Discovery forced the network to fire Marquardt following a routine post litigation review. Always having an eye for the dramatic, Darcy even dramatized how Marquardt sent the e-mail to his colleagues to let them know he was leaving: At 10:04am on Monday, Alex Marquardt took a deep breath and pressed send on an email to his CNN colleagues, bidding them farewell. “It’s been an extraordinary time, which is why it’s so tough to say goodbye,” he wrote in the surprise announcement, reflecting on his eight years at CNN and calling it an “honor” to work alongside the network’s national security team. He didn’t mention that he had just been dismissed. Or that CNN—after defending him through a closely-watched defamation trial, promoting him, and grooming him as a future anchor—had abruptly severed ties. Curious, he had all those details about Marquardt’s deep breaths before hitting send but claimed “Marquardt also declined to comment.” Marquardt went largely silent for a while, and giving no hint at what he was doing for work in the interim. Over time, Marquand grew more active as he posted and reposted content critical and/or mocking of America, President Trump, and Israel. His activity really took off after the start of the war with Iran. It really was a fitting pairing.   July 1st, 2026 11:30 AM Nicholas Fondacaro 295808 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/john-stossel/2026/07/01/self-driving-cars-politicians-ignore-safety-protect-jobs Car accidents kill 100 Americans every day. But now an amazing solution is available: self-driving cars. Robotaxis like Google-owned Waymo, for example. Passengers who try them, like them. Wherever robotaxis are allowed, ridership increases fast. Two years ago, there were 50,000 trips per week -- today 500,000. “The car did a better job than if somebody was driving!” says a passenger in my new video. Waymo claims its cars are “10 times safer” than human-driven ones. I wouldn’t believe that if insurance companies, with their own money at stake, didn’t agree. Reinsurance News reports Waymo’s had an “88% reduction in property damage claims and a 92% reduction in bodily injury claims.” “We have the data,” says Adam Thierer, author of “Permissionless Innovation.” “94% of all accidents are attributable to human error ... We can address one of the leading killers of Americans!” Unfortunately, some politicians say you shouldn’t be allowed to try robotaxis. New York state senator Luis Sepulveda wants a law that says motor vehicles for hire “shall not be ... operated by an automated driving system without a human driver ... seated behind the steering wheel and engaged in the task of driving.” He says the state must protect immigrant taxi and Uber drivers who live in his district. “I cannot support something that is going to almost overnight lead to loss of jobs of over 100,000 people.” “Even if he isn’t needed?” I ask. “Even if he’s worse than the machine?” “I don’t think that having an individual in a vehicle would be worse than a machine,” says Sepulveda.      “That’s just wrong,” says Thierer. “Humans get drunk, drowsy, distracted. Say what you want about robots, they don’t get drunk.” Sepulveda responds: “Waymo is going to make billions of dollars -- let them pay for the disruption to the labor force.” “Sounds like a mafia pitch,” I push back. “‘Want to come here, Waymo? You have to pay.’” “If the pitch sounds like a mafia pitch, so be it,” Sepulveda replies. I thought I might change his thinking by making a creepy comparison, telling him his ban would kill more people than infamous serial killers have. Ted Bundy, Jeffrey Dahmer and John Wayne Gacy combined killed about 80 people. Human-driven cars kill more people every day. “The data on Waymo is not 100% safety,” he replies. “A Waymo vehicle struck a child in California.” Like most critics, he cites isolated incidents. Even that child wasn’t injured. Millions of miles of data show that robocars are much safer. And they keep getting safer. We humans learn from our own experiences, but self-driving cars learn from millions of miles of experience. They get better while we sleep. Yes, some drivers will lose jobs. But technology constantly does that. Despite all the jobs destroyed by computers, U.S. unemployment has stayed relatively low. Typists, switchboard operators and elevator operators lost jobs. But most found other jobs, often better jobs. “Some people want cars with no drivers,” I tell Sepulveda. “Women feel unsafe. Some drivers don’t smell good. Some are reckless.” “Many women feel safer with a driver,” he replies. “Shouldn’t people have the choice?” I ask. “Absolutely.” “But you want to take away the choice!” “No,” says Sepulveda. “I’m saying, (protect) the drivers that exist now.” I say, with 100 Americans dying in cars every day, politicians who slow the arrival of self-driving cars have blood on their hands. Every Tuesday at JohnStossel.com, Stossel posts a new video about the battle between government and freedom. He is the author of “Government Gone Wild: Exposing the Truth Behind the Headlines.” July 1st, 2026 10:06 AM John Stossel 295807 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/alex-christy/2026/07/01/pbs-frontline-doc-tries-blaming-abraham-accords-october-7 PBS debuted its latest Frontline documentary on Tuesday entitled The Crown Prince & The President, which sought to examine the relationship between President Trump and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. Towards the end, correspondent Martin Smith observed that October 7 ended any real possibility of Trump’s big goal of Israeli-Saudi normalization and not only suggested Special Envoy Jared Kushner and the Abraham Accords were to blame but that such criticism is actually conservative. One of the people Martin interviewed was President Biden's ambassador to Saudi Arabia from 2023-2025, Michael Ratney. As Ratney tells it, even an autocratic de facto ruler of an absolute monarchy needs to consider public opinion, which led MBS to end normalization efforts with Israel as a result of its response to October 7. That led Smith to claim, “Some observers put the blame on Kushner's Abraham Accords.”   PBS's new Frontline documentary on Trump and Saudi Arabia tries to pass off blaming the Jared Kushner and the Abraham Accords for October 7 as a conservative opinion by having Curt Mills say "I don't think the Abraham Accords happen without Jared Kushner. But if there was any… pic.twitter.com/8waFRGGe2V — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) July 1, 2026   In a voiceover, Ratney added, “I think the clear flaw from the beginning of the Abraham Accords was it did nothing to settle the fate of the Palestinian people.” A second person blaming Kushner for October 7 was Curt Mills, executive director of The American Conservative. Mills claimed, “I don't think the Abraham Accords happen without Jared Kushner. But if there was any leading intellectual critique of them, it was that they abandoned Palestine. They abandoned the Palestinian people.” Sitting down with Trump’s former deputy national security advisor for Middle Eastern affairs, Victoria Coates, Martin tried to give credence to Mill’s claim, “Curt Mills of American Conservative laid the events of October 7 at the feet of Jared Kushner.” Coates reacted with an appropriate amount of revulsion, “Well, that's completely inconsistent with my experience with Jared. Jared is sincerely interested in the future of the Palestinian people and worked hard to come up with a deal that would be satisfactory because, you know, in his mind, to my understanding, this is also the best thing for Israel.” No matter what any left-wing college campus agitator, jihadi terrorist, or allegedly conservative commentator says, October 7 is Hamas’s fault. To lay the blame “at the feet” of anybody else is obnoxious and repulsive. Here is a transcript for the June 30 show: PBS Frontline: The Crown Prince & The President 6/30/2026 11:15 PM ET MARTIN SMITH: Some observers put the blame on Kushner's Abraham Accords. MICHAEL RATNEY: I think the clear flaw from the beginning of the Abraham Accords was it did nothing to settle the fate of the Palestinian people. CURT MILLS: I don't think the Abraham Accords happen without Jared Kushner. But if there was any leading intellectual critique of them, it was that they abandoned Palestine. They abandoned the Palestinian people. SMITH: Curt Mills of American Conservative laid the events of October 7 at the feet of Jared Kushner. VICTORIA COATES: Well, that's completely inconsistent with my experience with Jared. Jared is sincerely interested in the future of the Palestinian people and worked hard to come up with a deal that would be satisfactory because, you know, in his mind, to my understanding, this is also the best thing for Israel. July 1st, 2026 10:05 AM Alex Christy 295806 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/geoffrey-dickens/2026/07/01/ashamed-usa-medias-worst-anti-american-outbursts The vast majority of Americans are spending this Independence Day weekend taking pride in their country as they celebrate the freedoms established by the Founding Fathers. However, there are some journalists who are embarrassed by the USA. Some of them even seem to take pride in actually shaming the country.     Over the years, the Media Research Center has caught journalists ridiculing and deriding America. The following is a countdown of the Media’s  Worst Anti-American Outbursts (as culled from the MRC’s archives):   27. Americans Who Live on “Stolen Land” Should Stop Griping About Crime Epidemic “America is a sticky-fingered nation built on stolen land, and its current moral panic is about shoplifting.”— Washington Post features reporter Maura Judkis in March 1, 2024 story.   26. Hope You Had A Happy Fourth of July, Too “Oh say, we’ve seen too much. The Star-Spangled Banner pushes like a cough through America’s mouth and the twilight’s last gleaming is just that, a sickly flash above our heads as we ride unsuspecting in the bellies of sleek trains, plop to our knees in churches, embracing truths that disgust us.”— Boston Globe arts critic and poet Patricia Smith in The Nation’s “Patriotism” issue, July 15/22, 1991.   25. Respecting Anthem = Racism   FLASHBACK: “Some of the words of the National Anthem are white supremacist....I think this is a country whose history is racist, whose history is steeped in white supremacy, and the anthem reflects that in its very words.” — Detroit Free Press writer Stephen Henderson on NBC’s… pic.twitter.com/sawM4zwPc1 — Geoffrey Dickens (@GCDickens) June 30, 2026   “Some of the words of the National Anthem are white supremacist....I think this is a country whose history is racist, whose history is steeped in white supremacy, and the anthem reflects that in its very words.” — Detroit Free Press writer Stephen Henderson on NBC’s Meet the Press, September 24, 2017.   24. Now Is the Part of the Debate Where You Should Dump on America  “Governor Romney, Daniel Duchovnik [ph] from Walnut Creek, California wants to know, ‘What do you dislike most about America?’”— Online question selected by The Politico’s Jim VandeHei to pose to the Republican presidential candidates at their May 3, 2007 MSNBC debate.   23. Liberal Radio Host: It Pains Me to Chant “U.S.A!”  “As I’ve grown older, I find my ‘U.S.A.!’-chanting reflex increasingly interrupted by pangs of discomfort, and not because I’m ashamed of our country or our Olympians....Missed in the ensuing red-white-and-blue hoopla, of course, is the fact that we are not so exceptional outside the Olympic village....We are not gold, silver or even bronze medalists when it comes to healthcare; sadly, we are 39th for infant mortality, 43rd for female mortality, 42nd for adult male mortal-ity....If we do stand atop a dais anywhere other than at a sporting event, it is for military spending, carbon emissions and incarceration rates.”— Colorado radio host David Sirota in an August 1, 2012 piece for Salon.com, “Don’t chant ‘U.S.A.!’ It’s liberal Americans’ Olympic dilemma: How do they root for their countrymen without being jingoistic?”   22. Ringing the Bells of Jingoism  “The pro-American approach is one NBC rarely detours from. It is in the DNA of Olympic broadcasting. Networks around the world with the rights to the Games can toll their jingo bells when they please. And it’s easier to interview your own nation’s athletes, especially if language barriers exist. Still, there should be a better way to present these stories without so much American navel-gazing.”— New York Times sports/TV columnist Richard Sandomir in an August 17, 2016 column.   21. Sunny Hostin: America is a “Sick” and “Racist” Country   FLASHBACK: “I think it’s ridiculous that people don’t see what this country was founded on and what this country still is sickened with. It’s a sick country. It’s a racist country.” — ABC’s The View co-host Sunny Hostin on Behind the Table podcast, November 18, 2025. pic.twitter.com/hqhtKGMWnO — Geoffrey Dickens (@GCDickens) June 30, 2026   “I think it’s ridiculous that people don’t see what this country was founded on and what this country still is sickened with. It’s a sick country. It’s a racist country.”— ABC’s The View co-host Sunny Hostin on Behind the Table podcast, November 18, 2025.   20. Embarrassed by the Star Spangled Banner    FLASHBACK: “I mean, when you think about it, it’s ‘bombs bursting in air,’ ‘rocket’s red glare,’ it’s all kinds of — you know a lot of national anthems are that way, too — all kinds of military jargon, and the land — there’s only one phrase ‘the land of the free,’ which is kind… pic.twitter.com/1gyMf9XxGs — Geoffrey Dickens (@GCDickens) June 30, 2026   “I mean, when you think about it, it’s ‘bombs bursting in air,’ ‘rocket’s red glare,’ it’s all kinds of — you know a lot of national anthems are that way, too — all kinds of military jargon, and the land — there’s only one phrase ‘the land of the free,’ which is kind of nice, and ‘the home of the brave?’ I don’t know....Are we [Americans] the only ones who are brave on the planet? I mean, ‘all the brave people live here.’ I mean, it’s just stupid, I think. I’m embarrassed, I’m embarrassed every time I hear it.”— Former CNN and MSNBC host Bill Press on his Full Court Press nationally-syndicated radio show, June 5, 2012.   19. Despising the Stars and Stripes  “My daughter, who goes to Stuyvesant High School only blocks from the World Trade Center, thinks we should fly an American flag out our window. Definitely not, I say: The flag stands for jingoism and vengeance and war. She tells me I’m wrong — the flag means standing together and honoring the dead and saying no to terrorism. In a way we’re both right....[The flag] has to bear a wide range of meanings, from simple, dignified sorrow to the violent anti-Arab and anti-Muslim bigotry that has already resulted in murder, vandalism and arson around the country and harassment on New York City streets and campuses.”— The Nation’s Katha Pollitt in an October 8, 2001 column.   18. Red, White, and Scary  “A friend of ours, a prominent member of the ‘liberal media,’ wrote to the head of our kids’ school last week suggesting that students spend more time with the Pledge of Allegiance and The Star-Spangled Banner. The principal agreed. Our 10-year-old daughter asked her mother if we could put a flag on our car. My wife reluctantly agreed, but hasn’t procured the flag yet....My wife essentially shares our daughter’s feelings. But for her, the symbol of the flag was appropriated in her youth by counter-protesters who used it to deny the patriotism of the war’s opponents. Flag-waving feels aggressive to her.”— Former CBS Evening News producer Dick Meyer in a commentary posted October 1, 2001 on CBSNews.com.   17. CNN Celebrates America’s 250th Birthday: “There is a Slur” in the Declaration of Independence   Happy 4th of July! CNN anchor Victor Blackwell devoted a segment to "Grievance 27" in the Declaration of Independence and its language about "merciless Indian savages" and the Founders having a "deep hatred for indigenous people." Don't watch CNN this weekend. pic.twitter.com/t61UJTMWWp — Tim Graham (@TimJGraham) June 29, 2026   “There is a slur in America’s founding documents….a list of grievances against the king. A series of reasons the colonies wanted to split from the United Kingdom. And this is the final one. ‘He has excited domestic insurrections among us and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers the merciless Indian savages whose known rule of warfare is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.’ ‘Merciless Indian savages.’ Words in the Declaration of Independence largely forgotten that line and Native Americans place in the celebrations of the 250 years since our nation’s founding.”— CNN anchor Victor Blackwell on CNN’s First of All, June 27, 2026.   16. Ali Velshi: I Feel “Deep Unease” About Celebrating 250th Anniversary of “Our So-Called Democracy”   Go back to Canada? MS NOW anchor Ali Velshi thinks America is a mess, not worth celebrating: "I feel a deep unease about the celebrations to which I am invited to mark the 250th anniversary of our so-called democracy." MS NOW sounds like Al-Jazeera. pic.twitter.com/74FqKkiNjM — Tim Graham (@TimJGraham) June 3, 2026   “In one month, America will mark the 250th anniversary of its founding. Like previous anniversaries, there is a deep unease about this. I feel a deep unease about these celebrations to which I am invited to mark the 250th anniversary of our so-called democracy because this 250th anniversary is taking place during yet another period of deep and fundamental and existential unrest in this country brought on by the country’s unresolved racial politics. That’s what this is. Women and Black Americans have seen their rights taken away. The Voting Rights Act has effectively been gutted.”— Host Ali Velshi on MS NOW’s Velshi, May 31, 2026.   15. America Is a Country “Based on Racism and Slavery”  “Because of my lived experience as an afro-Latina, I’m able to look at this world with a different prism and I’m able to tell this country and tell this audience and tell my fellow co-hosts some uncomfortable truths. This is a country based on racism and slavery and founded in it. — Co-host Sunny Hostin on ABC’s The View, November 17, 2025.   14. Bakari Sellers: Not Much Difference for Black Americans In 1896 and 2026   “If somebody fell asleep in 1896 and woke up today in 2026, they would simply say the only difference is now negroes have a TV show, and we wear nice suits. They’ve swapped out Klan hoods for Brooks Brothers suits.” — CNN political commentator Bakari Sellers on CNN NewsNight with… pic.twitter.com/CpRDw6i5n3 — Geoffrey Dickens (@GCDickens) June 4, 2026   “If somebody fell asleep in 1896 and woke up today in 2026, they would simply say the only difference is now negroes have a TV show, and we wear nice suits. They’ve swapped out Klan hoods for Brooks Brothers suits.”— CNN political commentator Bakari Sellers on CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip, May 11, 2026.   13. Taking Back the Flag     FLASHBACK: “I decided to put on my flag pin tonight — first time. Until now I haven’t thought it necessary to display a little metallic icon of patriotism for everyone to see....I put it on to take it back. The flag’s been hijacked and turned into a logo – the trademark of a… pic.twitter.com/npQy3RehNB — Geoffrey Dickens (@GCDickens) June 30, 2026   “I decided to put on my flag pin tonight — first time. Until now I haven’t thought it necessary to display a little metallic icon of patriotism for everyone to see....I put it on to take it back. The flag’s been hijacked and turned into a logo – the trademark of a monopoly on patriotism….When I see flags sprouting on official lapels, I think of the time in China when I saw Mao’s Little Red Book on every official’s desk, omnipresent and unread. But more galling than anything are all those moralistic ideologues in Washington sporting the flag in their lapels while writing books and running Web sites and publishing magazines attacking dissenters as un-American....I put it on to remind myself that not every patriot thinks we should do to the people of Baghdad what bin Laden did to us.”— Bill Moyers on PBS’s Now, February 28, 2003.   12. America Needs to Be Sanctioned, “We Are the Bad Guys”   FLASHBACK: “Our country needs to be sanctioned; we are the bad guys on the world stage. We are a menace to not only free people everywhere, but we are a menace to peaceful people everywhere.….We have to be stopped through the same kind of means that we have that our country and… pic.twitter.com/8uFY81JZDI — Geoffrey Dickens (@GCDickens) June 30, 2026   “Our country needs to be sanctioned; we are the bad guys on the world stage. We are a menace to not only free people everywhere, but we are a menace to peaceful people everywhere.….We have to be stopped through the same kind of means that we have that our country and others have used to rebuke a North Korea or a China or name a rogue state, we are the rogue state, and other countries need to start treating us like that.”— The Nation justice correspondent Elie Mystal on The Joy Reid Show podcast, June 28, 2025.   11. Happy Independence Day, America Sucks  “We know what July 4th is. What about July 5th? After the fireworks, the music, the rhetoric of freedom what then?...What kind of nation does our flag fly over now? Not a less innocent one, because American innocence was never the truth. Not one less reluctant to go to war without a good reason, because we have foolishly credited bad reasons in the past. But now the nation lacks even that. As our President demonstrated last week, we have become a people who wage unending war killing and maiming our young ones and theirs without being remotely able to say why.”— Columnist James Carroll in the July 5, 2005 Boston Globe.   10. Editor: I Want to Burn the Flag  “If the U.S. Senate follows its silly siblings in the House of Representatives and votes for a ban on burning the American flag, I’m going to burn one. It never occurred to me to burn a flag — except in some flag-retiring ceremony — but just the idea that Congress has nothing better to do than spend time on this nutty issue makes me want to burn one.”— Linda Grist Cunningham, Executive Editor of the Rockford Register Star in Illinois, in a June 26, 2005 column.   9. Let’s Shred the Constitution! “The framers were not gods and were not infallible. Yes, they gave us, and the world, a blueprint for the protection of democratic freedoms — freedom of speech, assembly, religion — but they also gave us the idea that a black person was three-fifths of a human being, that women were not allowed to vote and that South Dakota should have the same number of Senators as California, which is kind of crazy....If the Constitution was intended to limit the federal government, it sure doesn't say so.”— Time managing editor Richard Stengel in the magazine’s July 4, 2011 edition, which featured a picture of the U.S. Constitution going through a shredder with the headline, “Does It Still Matter?”   8. Post-9/11 Flag-Waving “Sometimes a Cousin to Intolerance”  “The CNN film [The Flag], based on a book by David Friend, focuses on the smudged American flag that three firefighters raised through the dust of the collapsed buildings at ground zero late in the afternoon of Sept. 11, 2001. A photograph of the flag raising taken by Thomas E. Franklin of the New Jersey newspaper The Record became a heartening, patriotic symbol for many on an otherwise awful day....[But] the photographer rebelled at efforts to make him a celebrity, and so did the three firefighters. A plan to turn the photograph into a sculpture became a source of controversy. Nationwide, flag-waving was sometimes a cousin to intolerance.”— From New York Times critic Neil Genzlinger’s September 4, 2013 review of CNN’s The Flag.   7. Forget About the “Terse and Old” Founding Documents  “The United States Constitution is terse and old, and it guarantees relatively few rights….The Constitution is out of step with the rest of the world in failing to protect, at least in so many words, a right to travel, the presumption of innocence and entitlement to food, education and health care. It has its idiosyncrasies. Only two percent of the world’s constitutions protect, as the Second Amendment does, a right to bear arms. (Its brothers in arms are Guatemala and Mexico.)”— New York Times Supreme Court reporter Andrew Liptak in a front-page February 7, 2012  “Sidebar” news analysis, “We the People Loses Appeal with People Around the World.”   6. American Revolution = “Monumental Mistake”  “American independence in 1776 was a monumental mistake....I’m reasonably confident a world in which the revolution never happened would be better than the one we live in now, for three main reasons: Slavery would’ve been abolished earlier, American Indians would’ve faced rampant persecution but not the outright ethnic cleansing Andrew Jackson and other American leaders perpetrated, and America would have a parliamentary system of government....Government spending in parliamentary countries is about 5 percent of GDP higher.”— Dylan Matthews in a July 2, 2015 post on Vox.com: “3 reasons the American Revolution was a mistake.”   5. Triggered By the American Flag    FLASHBACK: “We have tens of millions of Trump voters who continue to believe that their rights as citizens are under threat by simple virtue of having to share the democracy with others. I think as long as they see Americanness as the same as one with whiteness, this is going to… pic.twitter.com/xKdEFTTe1s — Geoffrey Dickens (@GCDickens) June 30, 2026   “We have tens of millions of Trump voters who continue to believe that their rights as citizens are under threat by simple virtue of having to share the democracy with others. I think as long as they see Americanness as the same as one with whiteness, this is going to continue….I was on Long Island this weekend, visiting a really dear friend. And I was really disturbed. I saw, you know, dozens and dozens of pickup trucks with you know, expletives against Joe Biden on the back of them, Trump flags, and in some cases, just dozens of American flags, which you know is also just disturbing, because essentially the message was clear: ‘This is my country. This is not your country. I own this.’”— New York Times editorial board member Mara Gay on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, June 8, 2021.    4. Standing For National Anthem is “Affirmation of American Empire”  “It’s a political statement to pledge allegiance to the flag. It’s a political statement to stand for the singing of the National Anthem. The fact is, Colin Kaepernick and me and many other people simply have different politics. It’s not neutral to pledge allegiance or sing the National Anthem. It’s an affirmation of the American empire.”— Political analyst Marc Lamont Hill on CNN Newsroom, September 23, 2017.   3. Elie Mystal: U.S. Constitution Is a “Piece of Crap”   FLASHBACK: “When South Africa got over apartheid, did they just go back to their Afrikaner racist constitution…No! They threw the whole thing out and started again….and they came up with a new constitution. It’s one of the reasons why the South African constitution is generally… pic.twitter.com/XEnOXuaMDa — Geoffrey Dickens (@GCDickens) June 30, 2026   “When South Africa got over apartheid, did they just go back to their Afrikaner racist constitution…No! They threw the whole thing out and started again….and they came up with a new constitution. It’s one of the reasons why the South African constitution is generally thought of as one of the best constitutions in the world and ours continues to be a piece of crap.”— The Nation justice correspondent Elie Mystal on the syndicated radio show The Breakfast Club, April 3, 2025.   2. “Uncomfortable” With Calling Veterans “Heroes”    FLASHBACK: “I think it is very difficult to talk about the war dead and the fallen without invoking valor, without invoking the words ‘heroes.’... I feel comfortable — ah, uncomfortable, about the word ‘hero’ because it seems to me that it is so rhetorically proximate to… pic.twitter.com/TtuZLDTWLF — Geoffrey Dickens (@GCDickens) June 30, 2026   “I think it is very difficult to talk about the war dead and the fallen without invoking valor, without invoking the words ‘heroes.’... I feel comfortable — ah, uncomfortable, about the word ‘hero’ because it seems to me that it is so rhetorically proximate to justifications for more war, and I don’t want to obviously desecrate or disrespect memory of anyone that’s fallen, and obviously there are individual circumstances in which there is genuine and tremendous heroism: hail of gunfire, rescuing fellow soldiers and things like that. But it seems to me that we marshal this word in a way that is problematic. But maybe I’m wrong about that.”— Host Chris Hayes talking about “The Meaning of Memorial Day” on MSNBC’s Up With Chris Hayes, May 27, 2012.   1. July 4th, MSNBC-Style: “Imperialism, Genocide, Slavery”    FLASHBACK: “The land on which they [the Founders] formed this Union was stolen. The hands with which they built this nation were enslaved. The women who birthed the citizens of the nation are second class….This is the imperfect fabric of our nation, at times we’ve torn and… pic.twitter.com/1ga4n3QIFH — Geoffrey Dickens (@GCDickens) June 30, 2026   “The land on which they [the Founders] formed this Union was stolen. The hands with which they built this nation were enslaved. The women who birthed the citizens of the nation are second class….This is the imperfect fabric of our nation, at times we’ve torn and stained it, and at other moments, we mend and repair it. But it’s ours, all of it. The imperialism, the genocide, the slavery, also the liberation and the hope and the deeply American belief that our best days still lie ahead of us.”— MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry on her eponymous July 1, 2012 program, delivering what she called “my footnote for the Fourth of July.” July 1st, 2026 10:00 AM Geoffrey Dickens 265824 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/siena-do/2026/07/01/historian-jon-meacham-claims-trump-inflicting-controlled-panic It’s no secret that the Democratic media hates America. There are plenty of examples, from Joy Reid to Ali Velshi to Joy Behar, and many more. And despite the barely-there ratings of many of these leftist news outlets, they sadly still have a sizable amount of influence over the American public. As America is about to celebrate her 250th birthday, a recent Gallup poll found that strong sentiments of pride and patriotism among Americans has fallen to its lowest level in 25 years. And, according to CNN’s Erin Burnett and Monday’s OutFront guest, historian Jon Meacham, that’s all Trump’s fault. “There’s a new Gallup poll that saw that just 53 percent of Americans say they’re ‘very’ or ‘extremely proud’ to be American,” Burnett said at the beginning of the segment. “Ten years ago, that same poll said the number was 81 percent.” “Is this really about Trump?” she teed up Meacham. He wasted no time enthusiastically assenting to that assumption: I hate to say it, but I think it is. One of the issues we're going to face over the next two and a half years is 'Was this the age of Trump, or are we in an age of Trumpism?' And on those three letters hangs a whole lot. No president - and President Trump would love to hear this - no President has ever had the grip on the, if you will, the cultural mind-share of Americans. Of all the men who've held the office, no one has been as omnipresent in the culture and in the minds, both of his supporters and of his foes.      Meacham is right that no President before Trump has ever held such sway over the culture before. Some of that is sheer force of personality. But a large chunk must also be attributed to the media’s unhealthy obsession with the President and their attempts to discredit him and demoralize his supporters. Regarding the poll, both Burnett and Meacham conveniently left out that Gallup also tracked American pride by party affiliation. The difference between Republicans and Democrats was staggering, which shouldn’t be surprising to anybody. 93 percent of Republicans said they were “extremely” or “very” proud to be Americans, compared to 51 percent of Independents and a shocking 27 percent of Democrats. Republican respondents have maintained a high level of pride in the country, while the Democrats have shown a steady decline since 2003. After 2013, that decline turned into a sharp nosedive, and this year, only 14 percent said they were “extremely proud” to be Americans, compared to 70 percent of Republicans. Even during the dark years of the Biden administration, Republicans remained “extremely proud” at a rate never dipping below 58 percent, while the Democrats during the same period got down to 26 percent. So, even though who sits in the White House may have some effect, Trump definitely isn’t all to blame, as Meacham suggested. What’s really to blame is the Democrats, their media, and their politicians forcing this anti-American agenda down the throats of their constituents.  The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read:   CNN's Erin Burnett OutFront 6/29/26 7:39:58 p.m. Eastern   ERIN BURNETT: OutFront now, Jon Meacham, presidential historian, Pulitzer Prize-winning biographer, and author of his latest book, American Struggle: Democracy, Dissent, and the Pursuit of a More Perfect Union. So, Jon, this has gone from a routine renovation to allegations of criminal algae, fertilizer sabotage. I mean, I don't even know what kind of a thriller it sounds like I'm talking about right now. Box cutters, threats of a decade in prison - Have you ever seen a president so fixated on something like this, or on monuments to himself? JON MEACHAM: No, and the answer to almost every question that begins, in the last decade, of 'have you ever seen' is no.  There's really not a precedent here in America. This is a kind of weaponized narcissism in many ways. It's a consuming narcissism that the President is indulging in. The problem is, you know, he's living in a reality show. The problem is it's our reality.  And I think as we approach this 250th weekend, I hope that we can remember what we need to return to, which is an actual engagement with the principles that the country has to be about giving as well as taking. And this President is very much about taking. BURNETT: So, you know, the 250th what - we're just a few days away now. You know, Jon, I was thinking about this the other day I was showing my kids my baby blanket, okay, because it was 1976. MEACHAM: Right. BURNETT: So there it is, it says 'born in 76' every baby at the hospital got one, okay, I still have mine, it's actually kind of amazing - it's a special thing, I save it.  But you know, now, when I talk about it with people that celebration was remembered as being universally joyful, you know everybody remembers where they were. And this one feels different to many Americans. There's a new Gallup Poll that saw that just 53 percent of Americans say they're 'very or extremely proud' to be American. Ten years ago, that same poll said the number was 81 percent.  My jaw drops when I see that. I mean, what do you see here? And is this really about Trump? MEACHAM: I hate to say it, but I think it is. One of the issues we're going to face over the next two and a half years is 'Was this the age of Trump, or are we in an age of Trumpism?' And on those three letters hangs a whole lot. No president - and President Trump would love to hear this - no President has ever had the grip on the, if you will, the cultural mind-share of Americans. Of all the men who've held the office, no one has been as omnipresent in the culture and in the minds, both of his supporters and of his foes. And I think part of the reason - in '76 I was, sort of a flag bearer in bicentennial parades and that kind of thing - part of what was being celebrated then was what Gerald Ford said on the 9th of August, 1974, when he took over from Richard Nixon, and he said, "Our long national nightmare is over," which is a memorable line.  The key part of that speech is, we have proven once again that we are a government of laws and not of men. And what President Trump wants to do is this to be a government of a man.  And I think that what his appeal is, is to tell people again, even those who support him, that there is so much to fear. They need him to stand in the breach. And so that's not an elevating message, right? And that would not lead to pride. It leads to a kind of, if you will, kind of almost a controlled panic. It's a constant struggle, and I think a lot of people enjoy it, honestly. July 1st, 2026 9:35 AM Siena Do 295795 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tim-graham/2026/07/01/fake-news-nprs-scotus-scribe-nina-totenberg-claimed-justice-alito National “Public” Radio legal reporter Nina Totenberg turned 82 in January, and she may be losing a step. On Tuesday, as the Supreme Court put out its final opinions of the term, she posted a false report on NPR’s website (and then repeated on air) that Justice Samuel Alito, 76, was calling it quits. “Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote the Supreme Court’s opinion reversing Roe v. Wade, is retiring, the court announced Tuesday,” the article began. The court did not announce that. Totenberg had a pre-written analysis of Alito’s tenure on the top court ready to go, but the shocking part is she never called Alito’s office to confirm, which is Journalism 101. The fake news came down within minutes, and on Tuesday night’s All Things Considered, she confessed: TOTENBERG: I did to my boss, and I scared everybody half to death for about five minutes, and it's entirely on me. It's not anybody else's fault. And I've written to Justice Alito to apologize, and I thought I would read you most of this letter, 'cause it tells you everything. (Reading) “Dear Justice Alito, there are no words to adequately apologize for today's error in reporting your retirement. It was entirely my fault. I rushed out of the courtroom after the opinion announcements, and when I realized that the usual rush of folks, after a few minutes, had not happened, I asked somebody what was going on inside, to which the answer was retirement announcements. I didn't hear the S on announcements and assumed - something no reporter should ever do - that you were retiring. It was the worst professional mistake of my more than 50 years in journalism. I could go on, but I don't know what else to say, except that I am so, so sorry.” And I am, eternally. You know, this was a rookie mistake. That's true. In a response, NPR Public Editor Kelly McBride correctly suggested a rookie would be fired for this kind of elementary mistake. One reason Totenberg’s reporting was accepted without any real attempt at NPR to double-check her is the assumption that she is an NPR Legend, and so it must be accurate. She noted that many people began speculating that maybe Alito's retiring later in the week or something, and she just jumped the gun. It's harder to imagine she was just this incompetent. McBride also suggested: “For most news consumers, the error is a blip, something that flashed across their feed or they heard on their radio. It was corrected quickly and will not have lasting consequences.” Totenberg usually plans on reporting that has "lasting consequences," like ruining conservative Douglas Ginsburg's Supreme Court nomination in 1987, and attempting to ruin Clarence Thomas's nomination in 1991 with Anita Hill's unproven claims of sexual harassment. Totenberg was "tick tight" with leftist Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg for decades, and even wrote a book about it (Dinners With Ruth) after Ginsburg died. Totenberg is Exhibit A in how NPR is a thoroughly ideological outlet that should never have been funded by the taxpayers.  July 1st, 2026 9:34 AM Tim Graham 295804 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tim-graham/2026/07/01/american-media-prioritize-british-royal-family-over-british-child There’s no longer much foreign reporting on television with the exception of natural disasters, or countries where Americans are engaged in military action. That’s certainly true of Europe – except for Britain. The networks, surely focused on ratings, display a fascination with the Royal Family. On Monday, NBC’s Today featured a four-minute report from London-based Molly Hunter obsessing over Prince Harry’s planned visit to his home country to promote the Invictus Games for veterans that he founded. ABC and CBS also offered full reports speculating on Prince Harry’s visit and whether Meghan Markle and their children will also attend. On June 17, NBC’s Hunter performed a four-minute Today report (complete with “In Depth” graphic) on the Earth-shaking story that 12-year-old Prince George will attend the Eton College private boys’ school in the fall, just as his father and Prince Harry did. To pad the report, she also touted how Princess Kate did a 24-hour mountain climb for charity after her recovery from cancer. ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, NPR, CNN, and MS NOW cannot be bothered for much more substantive British matters, like a recent report on the rape of young girls that came from Member of Parliament Rupert Lowe. The report estimates rape gangs victimized at least 250,000 girls across 149 local British authorities since the 1990s. It says many victims were young teenagers. Some were as young as four years old. The story erupted in America with Elon Musk, as Fox News reported he “reignited international attention on Britain’s grooming gangs scandal this week, amplifying a citizen-funded report that accuses the U.K. government of failing to protect children and teenagers from organized sexual exploitation.” Musk tweeted on June 16: "The politicians who turned a blind eye to the Rape of Britain must go to prison." The American networks have been completely obsessed with the Jeffrey Epstein files over the last year, constantly exploring how much guilt Donald Trump bears for his long-ended friendship with Epstein. So why can they not spare two or three minutes for this story? You can guess. The report found nearly 90 percent of the men convicted of rape gang offenses from 1997 to 2018 had “distinctly Muslim names.” Of these offenders, the overwhelming majority were Pakistani Muslim. The report states the obvious: “Political correctness, fear of racism and fear of losing electoral support from certain demographics have taken precedence over the protection of British children.” Child sexual abuse is considered newsworthy when the allegations are against white men, or against Catholic priests, and the allegations alone are enough to damage reputations of entire groups. The Left will exploit allegations to defeat the conservative Christians who fight against their cultural agenda. But Muslim immigrants are apparently a protected class. Rupert Lowe can be dismissed as a “far right” leader with the Restore Britain party. One might argue its estimates are overblown – but to do that, you’d have to actually engage with the accusations instead of hiding from them. It’s not the first report on this scandalous matter. The Jay Report was a 2014 inquiry commissioned by Rotherham – a city of 110,000 – that found “at least 1,400 children were being systematically sexually exploited in Rotherham between 1997 and 2013,” predominantly by Pakistani men. That was also largely ignored by the American media due to its racial and religious overtones.  The abuse investigations continue. In April, the British government launched a new national inquiry into grooming gangs across England and Wales. But our networks think the most newsworthy happenings in England are infotainment, like which school Prince George is attending next year. July 1st, 2026 6:08 AM Tim Graham 295801 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/jorge-bonilla/2026/06/30/nbc-mourns-supreme-court-opinion-banning-men-womens-sports The United States Supreme Court handed down two opinions which continue its precedent of protecting women and girls from the ongoing incursion of “trans women” into their athletic endeavors. NBC’s coverage of those rulings can best be described as mournful.  Watch the report in its entirety, as aired on NBC Nightly News on Tuesday, June 30th, 2026 (click "expand" to view transcript): WATCH: @NBCNightlyNews mourns the Supreme Court rulings affirming state prohibitions of men in women's school sports. Note the ACLU attorney saying "it's not about winning trophies, it's about learning life lessons." HALLIE JACKSON: To that other landmark ruling now, this one a… pic.twitter.com/F74cm6B9Vn — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) July 1, 2026 HALLIE JACKSON: To that other landmark ruling now, this one a win for President Trump- with the conservative majority ruling states can ban transgender women and girls from playing on female sports teams. Here’s Stephanie Gosk. STEPHANIE GOSK: Tonight, President Trump calling it a “big win” while civil rights advocates slam it as a blow to transgender rights. The Supreme Court’s conservative majority upholding state laws banning transgender girls and women from playing on female sports teams in public schools. Justice Brett Kavanaugh writing: “allowing only biological females to play on women’s and girls’ teams can reduce the risk of physical injury and ensure fair competition.” But the ACLU representing the two transgender athletes in the case calling it “devastating.” JOSHUA BLOCK: It's not just about winning trophies; it’s about learning life lessons. GOSK: 27 states currently ban transgender women and girls from participating in female sports, with an NBC News poll last year showing over 75% of Americans support those bans.  Macy Petty Charles celebrating today’s decision. She competed against a transgender athlete and hopes more states would pass bans. MACY PETTY CHARLES: I would hope that it would embolden every state to protect those female athletes and I hope that they themselves are emboldened today to take action- to speak up for what they know is right. GOSK: But critics of the ruling see a silver lining.  So you see it as a loss, but not as big of a loss as it maybe could have been? BLOCK: Absolutely. They didn't write a ticket, you know, for the other side to claim that you can discriminate against transgender people in all other contexts. JACKSON: Stephanie is joining us now and Steph, for states that do allow transgender athletes in women's sports, they can keep that in place, right? GOSK: Yeah, Hallie. This Supreme Court decision does not compel them to change their laws. But there are already lawsuits in some of those places to try and force bans. Hallie. JACKSON: Stephanie Gosk. Thank you. NBC put forth a lot of effort into making the report appear to look balanced. But the framing belied NBC’s bias in favor of the transgender position- especially Stephanie Gosk’s citation of the ACLU calling the opinion “devastating.” Then there was the ACLU attorney’s flippant quote: “It's not just about winning trophies; it’s about learning life lessons.” Unfortunately, many of these girls learned painful lessons they didn’t ask for by being thrown into events with biological males passing themselves off as females. In some cases, they suffered significant physical harm. From Fox News back in 2023: A North Carolina high school volleyball player said she suffered significant and long-term physical and mental injuries last fall when she was spiked in the face by a transgender athlete who was able to compete on a girls’ team because of a policy put in place by the state’s high school athletic association.  Payton McNabb, a senior at Hiwassee Dam High School in Murphy, N.C., spoke out for the first time about her injuries on Wednesday during a press conference where she called on state legislators to pass the Fairness in Women's Sports Act that would prohibit biological males from competing on girls’ sports teams, citing her own experience.  "Due to the North Carolina High School Athletic Association policy of allowing biological males to compete against biological females my life has forever been changed," McNabb said.  This part of the debate was deliberately left out of NBC’s report, as was the plight of women forced to share locker room and bathroom facilities with male athletes. These deliberate omissions were performed in service of casting transgenders as the true, pure victims of the kind of legislation upheld by the Supreme Court. The report closed out with various presentations of silver linings for advocates of the 25% side of a 75/25 issue as acknowledged by NBC. Slop like this might be deemed to be necessary in order for NBC parent company Comcast to hold its perfect Human Rights Campaign equality score. But it further helps to undermine the credibility of the Elitist Media, already at an all-time low.    June 30th, 2026 11:58 PM Jorge Bonilla 295802 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/culture/dawn-slusher/2026/06/30/netflixs-big-mistakes-preaches-hollywoods-favorite-gospel Will Hollywood ever tire of the extremely worn-out closeted gay Christian trope? If Netflix’s Big Mistakes is any sign, the answer is a very clear “no,” as main character Nicky/Reverend Nicholas (Dan Levy) lies to his congregation about being a “practicing” gay man who sneaks his male lover into his rectory for secret, overnight rendezvous. Nicky is a pastor at Glenview Community Church, and after service in Episode 1, he walks down a short path from the church straight to his home where his secret lover is waiting for him, only to almost be caught by the church’s secretary, whom he has no problem lying to: Netflix's 'Big Mistakes' preaches Hollywood's favorite Gospel- The closeted Christian pastor. #BigMistakes pic.twitter.com/zrFE8PwaWd — Dawn Slusher (@BlondeBlogger) June 30, 2026 Nicky: Because while you might reach that island and finally see those gardenias, will it have been worth it in the end if their sweet smell is corrupted by the smoke billowing in from the bridge you burned to get there? On that uplifting note, everybody, I would like to remind you that this is a fire-free zone, okay? Okay? We have a lot of hardwood flooring. If you wanted to contribute to the food drive, Rose would be happy to take your name. Hi, Helen. Tareq: You organize your drawers like a serial killer. Nicky: Yeah, that's the intention. Hi. F*ck. Rose: Reverend Nicholas! Nicky: Yeah. Rose? Oh, we're just letting ourselves in now, huh? We might need to chat about boundaries a little bit, Rose. Rose: The door wasn't locked. Nicky: Well, okay. Rose: Did I hear something, though? Nicky: No, I was just on the phone. Rose: Oh. The sponsorship team can do Friday. Nicky: Okay, great. Well, that could have been an email, but thank you for letting me know, and I'll see you tomorrow, okay? Rose: Okay. Nicky: Bye-bye. We later learn Glenview Community Church has no problem with Nicky being gay. But he’s expected to be “non-practicing,” which makes sense for someone leading a Bible-based church since the Bible clearly forbids homosexuality. Instead of Nicky applying at one of the many Protestant churches that ignore those parts of the Bible and allow “practicing” gay ministers, he figured it was fine to deceive his congregation and disrespect their rules: Netflix drama 'Big Mistakes' thumbs its nose at Christianity and the Bible with closeted gay pastor deceiving his congregation by having secret rendevous with his lover. pic.twitter.com/0JkAxPcVJb — Dawn Slusher (@BlondeBlogger) June 30, 2026 Tareq; Did I tell you I'm being honored by Out and Loud next month for the work that I do for them? Raising money for queer people so that they can be "out and loud"? Nicky: Mm-hmm. You've mentioned that a few times. Tareq: And yet, I can't surprise my boyfriend at work because according to his church, he can be gay but can't have a boyfriend. Nicky: They expect me to be nonpracticing, yeah. Tareq: I wanna practice with my non-practicing boyfriend, not be in my mid-thirties keeping our relationship a secret from our friends and family. Nicky: You had one job last summer, and that was to fix my roof. And you got greedy, okay? And now look at us. Tareq: I couldn't help myself. I got a thing for The Book of Mormon. Nicky: Do ya? Tareq: Yeah. Nicky: Well, I'm not Mormon, so… Tareq: I know, but you kinda dress like one. Nicky: I told you, as soon as my mom's campaign is done, I'm gonna find a new congregation. And we can, you know…practice outwardly and loudly. Tareq: I believe you, okay? Nicky: For as long as we'd like. Tareq: Okay, I'm gonna book that cruise this year, with or without you. Nicky: And I can't wait to go on that cruise with you. I can't wait to get norovirus together. Tareq: That's the best part! Nicky’s mother Linda (Laurie Metcalf) is running for Mayor, so he wants to delay transitioning to a new church now that he has a boyfriend in order to avoid causing controversy for her. She, however, urges him to have sex, telling him she believes his grandmother was secretly a lesbian and that avoiding intimacy for a long time can harden a person. “I think that you have made some very selfless decisions in your life,” she tells her son, “But if I'm being honest, sometimes I get scared that your closest relationship is with God. And don't take this the wrong way, honey, but God isn't touching your body for pleasure.” Lovely. When Nicky climbs back into bed with his lover one night and stares at a portrait of an angel on his wall, the discussion turns to religion and homosexuality. Nicky says he likes to think the angel is “pretty progressive” and that watching them have sex is the “most fun she’s had in years.” When Tareq asks why, “religion has such a problem with two people who are in love with each other,” Nicky answers, “Because God is perfect, but the people who interpret him are not.” Netflix dramedy 'Big Mistakes' claims millions of Biblical scholars across centuries are wrong on homosexuality. Jokes that an angel in a portrait is "progressive" and watching the pastor have sex with his lover is "the most fun she's had in years." #BigMistakes @netflix pic.twitter.com/cxCt3TnKLx — Dawn Slusher (@BlondeBlogger) June 30, 2026 Tareq: Where were you? Nicky: Hmm? Tareq: Where were you? Nicky: I had a parishioner in the hospital with double pneumonia. Tareq: Hmm. Who was it? Nicky: Jessica. Uh, Jessica's uncle. Do you… Tareq” I don't know… Nicky: Hmm. You might not have met him. Go back to bed. Tareq: I've really been enjoying staying over here the past few nights. Nicky: Me too. Tareq: You're worried she's been judging us? Nicky: I like to think she's pretty progressive. This is the most fun she's had in years. Tareq: Why is it that religion has such a problem with two people who are in love with each other? Nicky: Because God is perfect, but the people who interpret him are not. Big Mistakes would have us believe Nicky is both a rebel and a reverend and that the only real problem is everyone else’s “imperfect interpretation.” Millions of biblical scholars for centuries have consistently agreed that Scripture clearly prohibits homosexuality, from Leviticus to Romans to the words of Jesus on marriage. Paul even warns in 2 Timothy 4:3, “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires.” Look, we get that everyone is deserving of love and kindness. We all sin. Who someone sleeps with should really be no one else's business but theirs (and not something to Pride Parade about), except when it's in a Christian church leadership capacity. Hollywood needs to lay off the attacks on Christianity and Christians' personal beliefs about the sin (not the sinner) based on God's Word. Nicky’s convenient rationalizations also feel like the same boring, performative shrug Hollywood has been offering for years. Do better, writers. June 30th, 2026 11:02 PM Dawn Slusher 295794 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/nicholas-spinnato/2026/06/30/cnns-cornish-wonders-why-republicans-call-dsa-communists On Tuesday’s CNN This Morning, the short morning show focused heavily on the trials and tribulations of the Democratic Socialists of America and their rise, with candidates being nominated across the country, including in NYC last week and possibly in Colorado this week. In one of many segments on socialism and the Democrat Party, Cornish asked her panel about GOP’s labeling of the DSA as communists and said, “Do you think it's weird they're skipping straight to communism?”  After a segment on the possible election of a DSA candidate in Colorado, the show returned to Democratic socialists with talk of radical New York House District 13 candidate Darializa Avila Chevalier and her past social media posts:  So, the posts include favorable references to communism, Marxist ideology, and authoritarian communist figures. She says she has grown considerably since those posts. And when asked about President Trump accusing her of being a communist, she said this.   On Tuesday's CNN This Morning, Audie Cornish asked why some Republicans call DSA candidates communists: "Do you think it's weird they’re skipping straight to communism? ... And I just wonder why you can't just critique socialism as is, and you have to go straight to communism?" pic.twitter.com/87ObRQXMP1 — Nick (@nspin310) June 30, 2026   After a soundbite played from a Chevliar love-fest on MS NOW last week, USA Today White House Correspondent Francesca Chambers returned to comments President Trump made on the “threat of communism,” which led to Cornish to respond as she posed a question to the group: “Do you think it's weird they're skipping straight to communism?” Cornish then showed a graph of the unpopularity of socialism, which she said showed, “Americans in general don't view it all that much better than they did in 2010,” before she returned to question the use of “communism”: And I just wonder why you can't just critique socialism as is, and you have to go straight to communism? Former George W. Bush administration official Ashley Davis said communism was “much easier to understand,” to which Cornish responded, “Sounds scarier?” Davis and fellow panelist and Democratic strategist Chuck Rocha responded in unison: “Yeah.” Cornish then joked, “Straight back to the '50s (...) Love it!”   Ironically, later in the show, Cornish interviewed DSA-aligned Michigan Senate Candidate Abdul El-Sayed and asked about AI. She said El-Sayed "talked about public takeover" of AI companies, which El-Sayed disagreed with, as he called his idea "AI under democracy." She then… pic.twitter.com/VSI2dUtv9A — Nick (@nspin310) June 30, 2026   After she decried the use of communism to describe the DSA, Cornish had an interview with DSA-aligned Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed. In the interview, Cornish asked El-Sayed about A.I., as she said, “You have talked about public takeover, if I have that right? Or privatization.” El-Sayed took issue with the label of “public takeover,” and said the phrase he wanted to use was “A.I. Under Democracy.” He then continued and used the same “public takeover” line: I mean democracy is, like, you know, public takeover of government. Sounds like “seize the means of production” but with extra steps. Cornish then asked, “Who would run the company, the government or the people who own the company?” In an answer that did not clear anything up nor help Cornish’s point that DSA candidates are definitely not communists, El-Sayed made fun of the notion of a “takeover”: I think that if you have a technology that is going to vastly change the nature of the economy, it's really important that you have democratic oversight of that technology. So, if we call that a takeover, then we've had a takeover of a lot of different things. But I think democracy is a good thing (...) El-Sayed may have answered Cornish’s “skipping straight to communism” question. The transcript is below. Click "expand": CNN This Morning June 30, 2026 6:33:51 AM Eastern AUDIE CORNISH: A CNN K-File investigation uncovered deleted social media posts from Democratic congressional nominee Darializa Avila Chevalier's old Twitter account.  So, the posts include favorable references to communism, Marxist ideology, and authoritarian communist figures. She says she has grown considerably since those posts. And when asked about President Trump accusing her of being a communist, she said this. (Cuts to video) DARIALIZA AVILA CHEVALIER (D-NY, NOMINEE FOR NY-13): You know, I think that is - that framing is one that I've been very proud to be able to say I don't respond to. One in which I have been very intentional to say, I won't be reactive. (...) 6:36:56 AM Eastern CORNISH: No, seriously, I wrestle with this because also it's -- I would think it's fair game. If Democrats can go scrubbing for old tweets where you find out there are Republican candidates who have said things that are racist, doesn't it - isn't it fair game to go after somebody who has said, abolish police, or said things that actually are even directly related to policy? , FRANCESCA CHAMBERS: I think regardless of what are in these social media posts from any candidate, that President Donald Trump and the Republican Party are going to make this argument about these Democratic socialists as alleged communists one way or another. I mean, he's made it, you know, very clear, going back to his comments on Friday, when he was at a religious conservative conference and he spent most of his speech, by the way, talking about this, talking about the threat of communism. Explaining about how Democrats are going to try and offer you free stuff. And that might sound good for a couple of years. CORNISH: Do you think it's weird they're skipping straight to communism? Like isn't - I just want to show: positive opinions of socialism. In 2010, yes, there's movement from Democrats. Democrats now view socialism more favorably. But Americans in general don't view it all that much better than they did in 2010. CHUCK ROCHA: Right. CORNISH: And I just wonder why you can't just critique socialism as is, and you have to go straight to communism. ASHLEY DAVIS: Communism is much more, if you're just branding them, and [To Rocha] you know this as a communicator for campaigns, it's much easier to understand. CORNISH: Sounds scarier? DAVIS AND ROCHA: Yeah CORNISH: Straight back to the '50s. DAVIS: Yeah. CORNISH: Love it. Ok. Well - (...) 6:58:28 AM Eastern CORNISH: One issue I care about a lot on this show is A.I. and its effect on the economy to come. You have talked about public takeover, if I have that right? Or privatization. ABDUL EL-SAYED (D-MI, CANDIDATE FOR US SENATE): Takeover was not the word. If you want to use that word. CORNISH: Oh, what word do you want to use. EL-SAYED: A.I. under democracy. I mean democracy is, like, you know, public takeover of government. CORNISH: Who would run the company, the government or the people who own the company? EL-SAYED: I think that if you have a technology that is going to vastly change the nature of the economy, it's really important that you have democratic oversight of that technology. So, if we call that a takeover, then we've had a takeover of a lot of different things. But I think democracy is a good thing. And A.I. is a scary new technology, while democracy is a very tried and true old technology. And I'm just saying that you should have democracy overseeing the way A.I. is being deployed. (...) June 30th, 2026 10:19 PM Nicholas Spinnato 295793 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/business/joseph-vazquez/2026/06/30/crow-appetizer-cnn-admits-worst-may-be-over-iran-war CNN is slowly realizing it stepped on a rake when it chose to cry Apocalypse! for months to spook Americans about prices going to the stratosphere because of the Strait of Hormuz chaos. CNN Business economics reporter Elisabeth Buchwald published a piece on June 25 with a headline that said the quiet part out loud: “Inflation topped 4% in May, but the worst may be over.” Wait! So in other words, all that CNN crystal “bull” about oil not seeing $70 prices again until 2032 could have potentially just been a load of mindless media dreck? Perish the thought! Buchwald chose to shoehorn some common sense into the economic debate, underscoring why the media’s fixation on volatile energy prices artificially inflated by war jitters didn’t comport with reality. “But when stripping out gas and food prices, two of the most volatile components tracked, so-called core inflation rose at a much more muted annual rate of 3.4% from 3.3% in April.” It stands to reason, as MRC Business had been arguing for months, that prices will more than likely ease significantly once the Iran War is settled and schizophrenic commodity traders cool their jets over access to the Strait of Hormuz. For all the bluster to the contrary, the U.S. and global oil benchmarks in particular (West Texas Intermediate and Brent) are currently hovering around $70 a barrel.  With this context in mind, it’s worth reminding readers that CNN is the same network that ran this stupid headline April 2, “$200 oil isn’t as crazy as it sounds.” Buchwald herself tried to refurbish the inflation story as far back as March when CNN’s narrative over Trump tariff-driven inflation spikes never materialized. Buchwald moved the goalposts, pivoting from Trump tariff fears to blaming the Iran war for potentially sending prices skyrocketing. “Inflation held firm last month — but the war with Iran could change that,” read Buchwald’s March 11 headline. Now, as Buchwald inadvertently suggests, the ensuing Middle East conflict didn’t help CNN’s case against the president at all in retrospect.  Relatively speaking, the price fluctuations as a result of the Iran War completely paled in comparison to the 9.1 percent inflation rate under President Joe Biden in June 2022, which happened without an international war to boot.  In response, Buchwald is apparently getting a head start on the crow eating as prices begin to head south and undercut CNN’s doom-mongering once again:  Meanwhile, spending and income rose faster than economists anticipated last month … Another positive development: personal savings ticked up slightly in May after dwindling for months as consumers spent more on gas … In a separate report from the Commerce Department, US gross domestic product, which measures all the goods and services produced in the economy, was revised higher to 2.1% from 1.6% in the third estimate. Buchwald is clearly aware CNN lost the argument, especially since her employer chose to feature the network’s obnoxious gas price ticker on-screen and on the website homepage before reducing its visibility when the metric started going south. Talk about peak narrative management! June 30th, 2026 9:30 PM Joseph Vazquez 295791 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/siena-do/2026/06/30/ms-now-proclaims-supreme-court-gave-trump-authoritarian-power Not all the Supreme Court verdicts released this week went Trump’s way, but the ones that did, the liberal media spared no grief over. MS NOW’s Ali Velshi, on the congealed propaganda slop disguised as his talk show The 11th Hour, started off Monday’s episode lamented over the Court’s decision on Trump v. Slaughter, which ruled that the president can indeed fire commissioners of executive agencies without cause.  Trump “won the kind of sweeping power that is more typically held by kings than presidents,” Velshi, dramatically proclaimed in his opening monologue.  He then explained how certain government agencies like the Federal Trade Commission, from which Rebecca Slaughter was removed, work: “Their jobs are essentially to be government watchdogs, to enforce the laws that are passed by Congress.”  Now, it’s not clear whether Velshi ever passed a fifth grade government class -- he only holds an honorary Doctorate of Laws from a Canadian university -- but the enforcement of the laws falls to the executive branch, not the legislative or judicial. As the head of the executive branch, according to Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution, President Trump holds the power to “appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for.”     The position of Commissioner of the Federal Trade Commission has no special exemption from this statute, so the President is at liberty to appoint someone to that job. It logically follows that the president may also fire a person holding that office.  But according to Velshi, this simple logic promotes a dangerous theory: In ruling in Trump's favor, [the Supreme Court] is promoting the Unitary Executive Theory, a concept that's found all over Project 2025. The Unitary Executive Theory seeks to massively expand the power of the presidency, proposing that the President has far broader authority over the executive branch than he currently has. The decision gets us one step closer to handling - handing authoritarian power to a person who aspires to be an authoritarian, and that was the intended result.  These are the same people who beat their chests and gnashed their teeth over D.O.G.E. firing useless government bureaucrats, the removal of Scott Pelley from CBS, and any other personnel changes they can even tangentially tie to Trump. In their minds, once people they like get into any kind of job, they should be able to hold it forever, no matter how unqualified or downright harmful they end up being for the company, agency, or government. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: MS NOW's The 11th Hour with Ali Velshi 6/29/26 11:01:32 ALI VELSHI: It is Monday, June the 29th, 127 days until the midterm elections. And today, at the hands of the Supreme Court, Donald Trump lost one tool in his voter suppression arsenal, one personal vendetta, and the ability to freely meddle in the federal reserve, for now.  But he didn't lose everything. In one unusual case, he won the kind of sweeping power that is more typically held by kings than by presidents.  (...) 11:03:28 Cook's case is tricky for Trump because the Supreme Court sees the Federal Reserve as a 'quasi-private, uniquely structured entity.' It stands apart from other federal agencies in the government's domain.  That's why this second case that the Supreme Court decided today is the thornier one, the one that will have broader implications going forward. The woman at the center of that second case is named Rebecca Slaughter. She was originally appointed by Donald Trump to fill a vacant seat on the Federal Trade Commission. After Slaughter completed her first seven-year term, Biden renominated her. But when Trump returned to office last year, he swiftly fired Slaughter and the other Democratic Commissioner, Alvaro Bedoya.  In a few moments, I'm going to speak to the former Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan, who served alongside both Slaughter and Bedoya. But listen to what Khan's initial reaction was when I spoke to her about this last year, just days after the two commissioners were fired:[Cut to interview] LINA KHAN: This is blatantly illegal. That's the first thing to know that the law is crystal clear, that commissioners can only be fired if they do something egregiously wrong, if they engage in malfeasance, neglect of duty, some type of inefficiency. So there's no gray zone here. What the administration is trying to do by firing them violates the law.[Cut back to live] VELSHI: Now, you may not think much about the Federal Trade Commission, or the National Labor Relations Board, or the Merit Systems Protection Board on a daily basis, but their work is essential in making society function in all sorts of ways.  There are about two dozen agencies like these. Their jobs are essentially to be government watchdogs, to enforce the laws that are passed by Congress. They're responsible for regulating safety standards, overseeing worker protections, protecting consumers and businesses alike. The list goes on.  These agencies are established by Congressional statute, and they were intended to be independent, to operate outside of political influence. While their officers are often appointed by a president, they're often led by people who are experts in their field. And for the past century, it's been understood that the heads of these agencies don't serve at the whim of the president.  When Congress created the Federal Trade Commission in 1914, it included a provision that commissioners could only be removed for 'inefficiency, neglect of duty or malfeasance.' Two decades later, after then-President Franklin D. Roosevelt tried to fire a man named William Humphrey, the Supreme Court upheld that law and said that the president does not have 'Illimitable power of removal.' That case is known as Humphrey's Executor v. the United States. And for 91 years that was the law.  President could not fire the leaders of independent agencies without cause. Until today. The six conservative Justices who make up the majority of the Supreme Court ruled that Trump can fire Slaughter, expanding the powers of the presidency as we know it. Slaughter spoke about her concerns earlier today: [Cut to video] REBECCA SLAUGHTER: What I'm worried about the most is the way the agencies that are going to use tools that were set up to be applied, applied neutrally, without fear or favor, instead, to create enormous fear by wielding incredible favors at the President's behest.[Cut back to live] VELSHI: But the Supreme Court has unleashed something even more serious than that. In ruling in Trump's favor, it is promoting the Unitary Executive Theory, a concept that's found all over Project 2025. The Unitary Executive Theory seeks to massively expand the power of the presidency, proposing that the President has far broader authority over the Executive Branch than he currently has. The decision gets us one step closer to handling - handing authoritarian power to a person who aspires to be an authoritarian, and that was the intended result. On social media, Donald Trump called it a, 'BIG WIN,' all capitals. He said the quiet part out loud, calling the decision 'The greatest increase in presidential power in the last 100 years.' 'The greatest increase in presidential power in the last 100 years.' That's not a good thing. June 30th, 2026 8:58 PM Siena Do 295785 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/cnsnews/craig-bannister/2026/06/30/senator-scotus-birthright-citizenship-ruling-final-alarm Republicans reacted to Tuesday’s Supreme Court ruling on birthright citizenship by issuing warnings of its consequences – and spelling out their plans to address them. With its 5-4 ruling on Trump v. Barbara, the Supreme Court struck down President Donald Trump’s 2025 executive order declaring that children of illegal aliens and foreign nationals temporarily in the country are not citizens of America simply because they are born on U.S. soil. The issue addressed by the Supreme Court is summarized in its ruling: “The question presented is whether the Constitution guarantees citizenship to children born in the United States of parents who are unlawfully or temporarily present in the country. Under the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, ‘[a]ll persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.’” In his executive order, “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,” Pres. Trump cited the 14th Amendment: “The Fourteenth Amendment has always excluded from birthright citizenship persons who were born in the United States but not ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof.’ Consistent with this understanding, the Congress has further specified through legislation that ‘a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof’ is a national and citizen of the United States at birth, 8 U.S.C. 1401, generally mirroring the Fourteenth Amendment’s text.” Thus, children born in the U.S. to parents who are unlawfully or temporarily in the country are not automatically granted citizenship, the executive order states. Lawsuits and stays granted by several federal judges across the U.S. prohibited the Trump administration from enforcing the order while challenges to it moved forward in court. On Tuesday, the Supreme Court settled the case by striking down the executive order and granting citizenship to anyone born in the U.S., regardless of parental status: “Held: Children born in the United States to parents unlawfully or temporarily present are ‘subject to the jurisdiction’ of the United States and are citizens at birth under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause.” “Birth tourism is a thriving industry that mocks American citizenship, and today the Court let it stand,” Rep. Kat Cammack (R-FL) warned a social media post reacting to the decision and promising that “This fight is not over. Not even close.” “The American people deserve a citizenship system that cannot be gamed by anyone with a plane ticket. Congress needs to act and I will lead that fight,” the congresswoman wrote in another post. “Giving citizenship to the offspring of illegals incentivizes illegal immigration,” House Republicans warned on their @HouseGOP X.com page. “This ruling is the final alarm bell,” Missouri Republican Senator Eric Schmitt wrote, stressing the vital need to properly confer and limit U.S. citizenship: “Citizenship is more than paperwork issued by the government. It is more than a bureaucratic label that grants access to government programs. Citizenship is the covenantal bond between a nation and its people.” …. “Citizenship defines the political community that governs the United States.” ….  “If we lose control of citizenship, we lose control of self-government itself.” “Under the Supreme Court’s decision, citizenship no longer reflects allegiance or loyalty to a country and its laws. It becomes an administrative status to be seized by interlopers,” Sen. Schmitt warned, vowing to pursue a constitutional amendment to protect the sanctity of citizenship: “Accordingly, I will be announcing a forthcoming constitutional amendment to restore the sacred bond between American citizens and their government.” Sen. Schmitt said his amendment will reflect the language in the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which states that “any person born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power” would be granted birthright citizenship. “Our generation’s existential threat is a hostile takeover through mass migration,” Schmitt warned: “The Supreme Court’s decision constitutionalizing unlimited birthright citizenship for the children of illegal aliens and temporarily present aliens is wrong—and disastrous for our sovereignty and the future of our republic. “The decision exposes America to grave national security risks and threatens to erode the integrity of the core of American self-government: citizenship.” While “Today is a sad day in the history of our republic,” Sen. Schmitt wrote, the nation will survive and overcome the threats created by Tuesday’s decision, thanks to the efforts and faith of patriots: “But America and the Constitution have survived for 250 years because each generation has had patriots who, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, valiantly fought back the existential threats this great nation has faced.” June 30th, 2026 4:15 PM Craig Bannister 295796 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/curtis-houck/2026/06/30/embarrassing-nbc-offers-trans-trigger-warning-insists-personal NBC News debased itself Tuesday with its Special Report on the Supreme Court decision allowing state bans of transgenderism in sports to remain in place, delivering a trigger warning about the use of “biological male” and “biological female” as well as scoffing at President Trump for “boil[ing] it down into bumper sticker language” when it’s unclear men have advantages over women and more care should be shown to a “deeply personal issue” that involves a “small” number of people. It started off fairly uneventful with chief legal correspondent and Saturday Today co-host Laura Jarrett — daughter of Obama Center CEO Valerie Jarrett — sticking to quoting the majority opinion from Justice Kavanaugh and stating the facts in a manner we often see from CBS’s Jan Crawford. Jarrett explained the “broad” ruling was “nationwide and far-reaching,” upholding state transgender sports bans and illuminated on the fact that Justice Neil Gorsuch was in the majority despite having authored a past case about LGBTQ individuals in the workplace. It wasn’t until chief Justice and national affairs correspondent Kelly O’Donnell came up that things went off the rails. She said President Trump would “consider this a very significant win, and will largely take some credit for bringing this to the cultural forefront,” but then conceded her discomfort with this acknowledgment of biology. Deploying one of the usual pro-trans tropes, O’Donnell told viewers, “It is also notable that it is narrow in the sense of the numbers of transgender athletes who are seeking to compete, that — that is a very small pool in many ways.” NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell downplays the Supreme Court decision against transgenderism in sports because “the numbers of transgender athletes...is a very small pool, in many ways,” and thus, we can’t know “some of those implications” about any “advantages...a biological male” has pic.twitter.com/vuypnLOz6C — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) June 30, 2026 She went further by insisting it’s still unclear whether biological men have physiological advantages over biological women, adding it’s too early to conclude “some of those implications.” O’Donnell doubled down on her virulently pro-trans narrative by blasting the President for “boil[ing]” the issue of transgenderism “down into bumper sticker language, talking about transgender athletes” as “universally bad” when it’s just “his interpretation.” LAME: NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell laments President Trump has “boil[ed]” transgenderism “down into bumper sticker language” when “it’s obviously much more complex,” and “an area of American life where there are very deeply personal issues, especially when it’s involving minors” and… pic.twitter.com/VMMvNDprDx — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) June 30, 2026 She went on by reiterating her “small” argument and insisting we all remember how “deeply personal” the matter is to those who are trans: It’s obviously much more complex. It’s an area of American life where there are very deeply personal issues, especially when it’s involving minors, religious implication, all kinds of things that make those cultural issues such hot buttons...[T]he Court is rendering a very significant decision that we’ll have far-reaching implications across the states, even if the numbers involved of specifically individual students who would bring cases like this or would participate, those numbers may be small[.] Today co-host Craig Melvin also embarrassed himself with Orwellian verbiage, posing what seemed to be a trigger warning for any trans person watching: “Just a quick note here. The terms that we’re using here during our reporting, biological male, biological female, the high court put those terms in quotations in their decision and their dissent. But just so you know, we’re using those terms from the decision itself, biological male, biological female.” INSANE: NBC’s Craig Melvin offers a trigger warning for trans people watching... “Just a quick note here. The terms that we’re using here during our reporting, biological male, biological female, the high court put those terms in quotations in their decision and their dissent.… pic.twitter.com/Hx15swCfJ6 — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) June 30, 2026 Melvin should consult both Genesis 1 and 5 as well as Matthew 19 to name a few chapters in the Bible laying out male and female. Jarrett thankfully returned and dispensed with analysis of the ruling without the ludicrous rhetorical throat-clearing. The closest she got to offering an opinion was correctly asserting topics such as this one are “so difficult for so many people who may be progressive in many ways, but on this issue, they end up siding with the conservatives on the issue, because they see it as an issue of equality for women and equality for participation.” Notice how, following Jarrett, Homeland Security correspondent also engaged in Melvin’s need to assert she was just using the Court’s (correct) descriptions of human biology (click “expand”): MELVIN: [Y]ou’re also just a few feet away from some protesters as well. What’s the sense that you’re getting from them? Are they happy about this decision? Are they disappointed by the decision? Or is it a mixed bat? AINSLEY: Well, they could have been protesters depending on how this decision went. But as it happens, Craig, the group that is behind me, and in front of the court, the most organized group is from people who were supportive of the decision today. They were for people — these are a group representing athletes who want people as they’re biologically born male or female — those terms that we’ve been using because they’re from the decision — they want states to be able to decide who can be in these sports, and that they feel that if a state decides that it should be a biological male or a biological female participating in those gendered sports, and that should be allowed to stand. So, we did hear cheers from this group, and just hear them again behind me today. They are in favor of this opinion today. Later, NBC News legal analyst Danny Cevallos had a Freudian slip when he started to say the Court can now let states discriminate against trans people, but stopped himself to instead say “make these decisions based on biological sex,” but will now open up a debate about strict vs. intermediate scrutiny: Ooof: NBC News legal analyst Danny Cevallos starts to say, but stops himself from opining in full the Supreme Court has now legalized discrimination against trans people by banning males from women’s sports pic.twitter.com/HzGG5UMIeb — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) June 30, 2026 Following a brief interlude to cover the campaign finance decision, the mood changed once the birthright citizenship case arrived and ruled against the President’s push to end it. After Melvin slipped up and claimed the Court had “struck down birthright citizenship,” Jarrett corrected him to mean the Court delivered “a hugely consequential moment for our constitutional structure, a landmark ruling from the Supreme Court striking down one of the most controversial moves the President has made in this second term.” “It was an immediate eruption of roar of cheers. We saw a lot of people who had been standing here in the shade waiting for this decision rush over. Some do have just come to see this for the day to...be here for this historic moment where the Supreme Court struck down this very unusual broad executive order,” an ebullient Ainsley said from outside the Court. O’Donnell boasted that while “the President has been preparing for this ruling,” he’s nonetheless “often [said] we’re the only country that has this” even though “[t]hat is not accurate.” “There are more than 30 nations that also bestow rights of citizenship based on birth, and another 50 that do it in a more limited way. So, the President’s contention that the United States was alone in this is just not accurate,” she continued. In much happier moods regarding this case, Melvin spent the next eight and a half minutes letting Ainsley, Jarrett, and Justice reporter Ryan Reilly to sound off on the birthright case and Chief Justice John Roberts’s full-throated defense of citizenship. Asked to wrap the Special Report with her thoughts about this Supreme Court term, Jarrett said there’s been “a rubric” developed of “a conservative majority” giving Trump wins on “immunity for potentially criminal acts,” “fir[ing] people from a dozen different federal agencies,” and “expelling hundreds of thousands of Haitians and Syrian refugees,” but not on birthright citizenship, the Federal Reserve, and tariffs. Cases such as the latter trio, Jarrett asserted, are “inflection points...when they have no choice but to really make a hard decision about something as it relates to this president, even if they don’t want to” and “pose a check on executive authority.” To see the relevant NBC transcript from June 30, click here. June 30th, 2026 3:01 PM Curtis Houck 295792 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/alex-christy/2026/06/30/ms-now-cnn-meltdown-after-scotuss-free-speech-ruling Tuesday was a busy day at the Supreme Court that was headlined by the upholding of birthright citizenship and state laws that sought to protect the competitive integrity of female sports. However, the Court also cited the First Amendment and free speech when it struck down a campaign finance law that limited how much money political parties can spend on candidates, which led MS NOW and CNN to suffer epic meltdowns at the news they considered to be the latest example in Republicans’ war on democracy. MS NOW Reports host Antonia Hylton simply put the ball on the tee for Brookings Institute senior fellow and Democracy Defenders Fund founder Norm Eisen when she declared, “Norm, I want your big picture take on what the Court has done to the curtain that I think at least Americans used to think there was between big money and their political voice.”   MS NOW suffered an epic melt down after the Supreme Court struck down party donation limits, citing the First Amendment. Antonia Hylton asked Norm Eisen "I want your big picture take on what the Court has done to the curtain that I think at least Americans used to think there was… pic.twitter.com/LvCdns7Ysl — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) June 30, 2026   The melodramatic Eisen began his response by claiming the ruling was a corrupt handout to the GOP, “Republicans who love this big, dark corporate money that is devastating our country went to their Republican colleagues on the Supreme Court, and they got an exemption to pump more of that corporate cash that has so broken our country, Antonia, and devastated the lives of working people to pour more of that money into the swamp.” The First Amendment is not an “exemption.” It’s the rule. Nevertheless, Eisen was then unwittingly torn between his narrative that money buys elections and some self-promotion proving that it doesn’t: But let me tell you, the American people are not going to tolerate that. Individual candidates have a small donor advantage on the Democratic side. This corruption of our political system with big money, as you saw on the screen, is rejected by a super-majority of Americans at Democracy Defenders Action, for example, we fought Elon Musk when he tried to outspend pro-reform candidates for the Supreme Court in Wisconsin. We — the big money turned that into a race, the people versus Musk, and they rejected him, even though he outspent by a factor of many times.  Getting back to the corruption allegations, Eisen was more explicit, “So, I think this is part of the reason that the Republican Party is so corrupt. We need to say that candidly, that their fellow Republican justices on the Supreme Court have gone ahead to break the playing field and let this huge flood of corporate and other dark cash into the system know the American people, irrespective of party, don't want that.” He then demanded, “We need to have Supreme Court reform, for example, term limits, and we need Congress to pass sane laws. This is no way to run a democracy. The American people of all parties hate it.” Over at CNN, chief congressional correspondent and Inside Politics guest host Manu Raju framed the ruling in terms of how it will benefit Republicans, “Just look at the amount of money that the NRSC, the Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee, which brought this case. $48.9 million that they have compared to the Democrats’ 38.9 million. That’s the Senate side. And it's — you compare it to the other outside groups as well, significant. So, that's why they can make up for that disparity.”   Over at CNN, NPR host Ayesha Rascoe claimed, "It's a huge deal, right? I mean, and then you couple that with the Voting Rights—being Voting Rights Act really being gutted. I mean, these are having impacts when people vote. . I do think that, you know, this is something where you… pic.twitter.com/T9CsC7z4mB — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) June 30, 2026   NPR host Ayesha Rascoe agreed and tried to tie the case to other recent Court rulings, “It's a huge deal, right? I mean, and then you couple that with the Voting Rights—being Voting Rights Act really being gutted. I mean, these are having impacts when people vote. I do think that, you know, this is something where you often talk to people, they want to get money out of politics. But the Supreme Court has went in the totally opposite direction.” She also claimed, “I do think that ultimately that does lead to a disconnect, right? Like people are going to go to cast their ballots in November, but are they actually being heard and represented? And, like, when you have decisions like this that seem to go against the popular will.” The Supreme Court is supposed to rule on the basis of the Constitution, not “popular will.” Understanding that should be the bare minimum for any media person talking about the Court. Here are transcripts for the June 30 shows: MS NOW Reports 6/30/2026 11:43 AM ET ANTONIA HYLTON: Norm, I want your big picture take on what the Court has done to the curtain that I think at least Americans used to think there was between big money and their political voice. NORM EISEN: Republicans who love this big, dark corporate money that is devastating our country went to their Republican colleagues on the Supreme Court, and they got an exemption to pump more of that corporate cash that has so broken our country, Antonia, and devastated the lives of working people to pour more of that money into the swamp. But let me tell you, the American people are not going to tolerate that. Individual candidates have a small donor advantage on the Democratic side. This corruption of our political system with big money, as you saw on the screen, is rejected by a super-majority of Americans at Democracy Defenders Action, for example, we fought Elon Musk when he tried to outspend pro-reform candidates for the Supreme Court in Wisconsin. We — the big money turned that into a race, the people versus Musk, and they rejected him, even though he outspent by a factor of many times.  So, I think this is part of the reason that the Republican Party is so corrupt. We need to say that candidly, that their fellow Republican justices on the Supreme Court have gone ahead to break the playing field and let this huge flood of corporate and other dark cash into the system know the American people, irrespective of party, don't want that. And you are going to see a resounding rejection of this at the polls in November. We need to have Supreme Court reform, for example, term limits, and we need Congress to pass sane laws. This is no way to run a democracy. The American people of all parties hate it. *** CNN Inside Politics with Dana Bash 6/30/2026 12:20 PM ET MANU RAJU: Just look at the amount of money that the NRSC, the Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee, which brought this case. $48.9 million that they have compared to the Democrats’ 38.9 million. That’s the Senate side. And it's — you compare it to the other outside groups as well, significant. So, that's why they can make up for that disparity. AYESHA RASCOE: It's a huge deal, right? I mean, and then you couple that with the Voting Rights—being Voting Rights Act really being gutted. I mean, these are having impacts when people vote. I do think that, you know, this is something where you often talk to people, they want to get money out of politics. But the Supreme Court has went in the totally opposite direction. And I do think that ultimately that does lead to a disconnect, right? Like people are going to go to cast their ballots in November, but are they actually being heard and represented? And, like, when you have decisions like this that seem to go against the popular will. June 30th, 2026 2:05 PM Alex Christy 295790 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/curtis-houck/2026/06/30/devastated-abc-bemoans-courts-blow-trans-athletes-last-day-pride Disney-owned ABC News was predictably forlorn on Tuesday in reaction to the landmark Supreme Court ruling protecting women’s sports, bemoaning the “blow” leveled by the decision’s “unavoidable” “exclusion” of “trans athletes” like one in West Virginia who will be “devastated” after having “bravely brought this case.” In addition, they feared the fallout for “the transgender community...on this last day of Pride Month.” Starting on ABC News Live moments after the ruling came down, legal contributor James Sample lamented the impending “exclusion” as “an unavoidable consequence”: ABC News legal contributor James Sample frets the SCOTUS ruling against transgenderism on women’s sports will lead to “exclusion” as “an unavoidable consequence”.... “Justice Kavanaugh, who is himself an addition to a Supreme Court justice, a sports coach of his own, coaches,… pic.twitter.com/LX4ngiBklD — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) June 30, 2026 Later, during an ABC News Special Report, streaming host Kyra Phillips and Court reporter Devin Dwyer touted the latter’s interview from January with West Virginia trans high school student “Becky” Pepper Jackson, who served as the plaintiff. Dwyer gushed Jackson had “bravely brought this case to the Supreme Court, insisting that she had an equal right to play with the girls,” but the Court turned away this request by upholding a state ban as well as those in 20 other states. He tried to sound hopeful by acknowledging “21 states don’t have bans on transgender athletes,” but couldn’t hide his disappointment because the ruling is “certainly a blow to that transgender community and student athletes on this last day of Pride Month, Kyra.” WATCH: ABC News is very sad about the Supreme Court keeping biological men out of women’s sports, denying trans kids who “bravely brought this case” and “a blow” to trans people everywhere “on this last day of Pride Month”... pic.twitter.com/CRIsKmOIvM — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) June 30, 2026 Chief White House correspondent and Biden regime apple polisher Mary Bruce had weigh in, huffing, “rarely does a day go by...when the President doesn’t rail against...transgender female athletes in girls and women’s sports.” ABC’s Mary Bruce laments “rarely does a day go by..when the President doesn’t rail against...transgender female athletes in girls and women’s sports” pic.twitter.com/H1aahN7Mfp — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) June 30, 2026 Back on ABC News Live, Dwyer predicted there’s “no doubt” Jackson and their family are “devastated.” He unspooled more Orwellian drivel: “I asked her if she would continue to play with the boys if this law was allowed to take effect, and she said no, because she is not a boy. She’s never identified as a boy. She has identified as a girl since third grade and she’s never gone through male puberty.” ABC’s Devin Dwyer says “no doubt” West Virginia trans student “Becky” Pepper Jackson is “devastated” because “she’s never identified as a boy” and “has identified as a girl since third grade and she’s never gone through male puberty,” and had “just won the state championship in… pic.twitter.com/4di5G4z4GV — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) June 30, 2026 “So, this is a big disappointment for her. 16 years old. She actually just won the state championship in West Virginia in — in shot put. But it isn’t necessarily an impact in 21 other states that don’t ban trans athletes. And that’s an important silver lining today for that community,” he added. Dwyer had different emotions about the birthright citizenship case, which went against the President. Touting the “landmark decision,” he said this was “a big win for the immigrant advocates, we should note, who had fought this case, the ACLU, who led the way, Cecilia Wang, herself a birthright citizen, arguing this case before the Supreme Court.” In addition to Bruce cheering the “huge blow to one of President Trump’s signature immigration promises,” Sample took issue with the fact that three justices were firmly in the dissent: ABC News legal contributor James Sample complains three Justices -- Alito, Gorsuch, and Thomas -- dissented in the birthright citizenship case, fretting the Overton Window has shifted so far anyone would call into question the 14th Amendment pic.twitter.com/HWVnJMi15n — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) June 30, 2026 Ironically, Dwyer and Sample had different views about the campaign finance case, with the former predicting more chaos and more ads, while Sample suggested “it may not be a hugely consequential decision” compared to others on the issue (click “expand”): DWYER: [Campaign finance laws] have stood in place for 25 years, Diane, enacted by Congress to prevent even the appearance of corruption in our elections, limiting the amount of money that political parties can spend directly on individual candidates, and those limits were meant to sort of keep in place the, you know, the guardrails of spending in our politics. So individuals who are only limited to donate so much can’t give big fat checks to the political party, who in turn can then spend it on candidates. But today, the Supreme Court said that violates the First Amendment and that parties should be able to spend as much as they want on individual candidates. And so those will now go away. The impact will likely mean more TV ads in our politics, Diane, because individual candidates get preferred rates with local TV stations. This decision now means that political parties who can coordinate with them can get those preferred rates as well. And so, with that added money from the parties, we’ll see more ad spending, particularly as we get closer to the midterm elections this fall. (....) SAMPLE: [T]he federal campaign finance regime that started with Buckley v. Valeo, which is the case that said that, in essence, money in the campaign context operates like speec, and therefore that First Amendment considerations are at the forefront, has changed so much over the last quarter century that these particular limits may that losing these limits may not have a huge impact, because they really only operated effectively in conjunction with other limits that have long since been struck down. So, I think that while we like to have quick takes on this one, it may not be a hugely consequential decision in isolation so much as only in combination. To see the relevant ABC transcript from June 30, click here. June 30th, 2026 1:44 PM Curtis Houck 295789 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/nicholas-fondacaro/2026/06/30/cnn-whines-scotus-allows-states-ban-men-so-called-girls In the year of our Lord 2026, CNN apparently still didn’t know what a woman was. In The Situation Room’s immediate reaction to Tuesday’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling upholding state bans on men (transgenders) completing in girl’s and women’s sports, CNN journalists openly mourned the outcome. Additionally, one of them suggested that the case involved those who were “assigned the male gender at birth” and “so-called girl’s sports.” Shortly after the media interns sprinted across the Supreme Court’s Front Plaza with the written opinions, CNN chief legal correspondent Paula Reid mourned the ruling: We just got a really important case about transgender athletes in student sports, and it does appear that here the Supreme Court says that states can bar transgender students from playing on girls' sports teams. So this is expected based on what we saw in oral argument, but it's the latest in a series of defeats for trans Americans amid political backlash, especially in conservative states.   CNN mourns that states can ban men from playing in women's sports. Paul Reid whines: "It's the latest in a series of defeats for trans Americans amid political backlash, especially in conservative states." pic.twitter.com/OuCRLYOE5c — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) June 30, 2026   Co-host Pamela Brown lamented, “this in many ways is not a surprise given this high court.” Of course, she reference the court ruling against allowing medical procedures on minors that would mutilate their bodies and leave them sterile, or, as she called it, “transgender care for minors.” Attempting to downplay the serious nature of the issue, Brown huffed about people opposing transgender issues at all given how small of a population they were. “And also there's a political element of this. Of course, this is an issue that is enmeshed in the culture wars in America, even though a very small percentage of Americans are transgender,” she bemoaned. “That's exactly right,” Reid agreed.   Pamela Brown huffs that people care at all about men completing in women's sports or men being in women's locker rooms or bathroom give how few there are: "Also, there's a political element of this, of course this is an issue that is enmeshed in the culture wars in America, even… pic.twitter.com/TIvomxzHoI — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) June 30, 2026   A short time later, chief legal analyst Laura Coates suggested “the crux of the issue” was about “somebody who was assigned the male gender at birth” being allowed to play in “so-called girl’s sports.” Coates only vaguely alluded to the possibly of there being an issue with biological men competing in women’s sports. Of course, she ignores the grievous injuries and stolen awards and keeps it in the realm of the theoretical: The argument that they were using to support a ban was that there was an unfair advantage provided to those assigned male at birth in women's competition. The other side said no, no, this is sex-based discrimination and it violates the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment and therefore you cannot do it. This has been, as Pamela said, at the heart of many culture wars and one about what the unfair advantage may be.   CNN's Laura Coates calls them "so-called girls sports": COATES: Here was the crux of the issue. It was whether or not somebody who was assigned the male gender at birth would be allowed to play in a traditionally so-called girls sports in a public, or a high school, or of… pic.twitter.com/5330RxpHvM — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) June 30, 2026   Playing dumb with how federalism allowed states to decide how things were conducted within their borders (when they didn’t violate the U.S. Constitution), Coates expressed concern of different laws in different states. “And so, you have the potential for a patchwork system as opposed to a workable framework that would be consistent across the board,” she said. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: CNN’s The Situation Room June 30, 2026 10:02:30 a.m. Eastern (…) PAULA REID: We just got a really important case about transgender athletes in student sports, and it does appear that here the Supreme Court says that states can bar transgender students from playing on girls' sports teams. So this is expected based on what we saw in oral argument, but it's the latest in a series of defeats for trans Americans amid political backlash, especially in conservative states. Now, this is significant because roughly half of the states in this country have similar laws, but this is one of the big cases that we've been watching. We just got it. We didn't have a chance to go all the way through it, but it does appear that the Supreme Court is allowing states to ban athletes from playing - transgender athletes from playing in girl’s sports. PAMELA BROWN: Yeah, and as I mentioned, you know, this in many ways is not a surprise given this high court. It has ruled against transgender care for minors. It has ruled in favor of the Trump administration when it comes to banning transgender people in the military, requiring birth sex and passports. Now, as you just reported, they're upholding these state bans or restrictions on transgender athletes playing. And also there's a political element of this. Of course, this is an issue that is enmeshed in the culture wars in America, even though a very small percentage of Americans are transgender. REID: That's exactly right. And the way this case came before the court, there were a pair of cases, one from West Virginia, one from Idaho. West Virginia, one dealt with high school sports, the Idaho case dealt with a college athlete, and this case coming before the Supreme Court at this time. Again, we watched in oral argument. It did not appear that they were going to be able to rule that these laws are unconstitutional based on the questions the justices were asking. So, this is a significant case. This is again one of the biggest culture war cases that we're seeing. (…) 10:04:39 a.m. Eastern LAURA COATES: This is a monumental decision. Not unexpected, however, given how the oral arguments went. Here was the crux of the issue: It was whether or not somebody who was assigned the male gender at birth would be allowed to play in a traditionally so-called girl’s sports in a public, a high school, or, of course, in the college setting. The argument that they were using to support a ban was that there was an unfair advantage provided to those assigned male at birth in women's competition. The other side said no, no, this is sex-based discrimination and it violates the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment and therefore you cannot do it. This has been, as Pamela said, at the heart of many culture wars and one about what the unfair advantage may be. And whether or not gender identity should be included in a sex discrimination case and otherwise. The courts seemed at the onset to be leaning towards this outcome anyway, but the fact that it has now happened now we have 27 or more states, I believe, who have this ban, different colleges, and the NCAA applies it differently to each and every type of sport. And so, you have the potential for a patchwork system as opposed to a workable framework that would be consistent across the board. (…) June 30th, 2026 1:23 PM Nicholas Fondacaro 295788 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/cnsnews/craig-bannister/2026/06/30/laws-banning-biological-males-womens-sports-upheld-supreme State laws limiting participation in school sports teams to athletes of the same biological sex are constitutional and violate neither the Equal Protection Clause nor Title IX of federal civil rights law, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Tuesday. The high court consolidated two cases, West Virginia v. B.P.J. and Little v. Hecox, producing a single ruling (“West Virginia v. B.P.J.”) applying to both. As a result, some judges concurred with the majority on one issue, but dissented on another. Thus, West Virginia and Idaho state laws separating sports teams based on biological sex were validated by a 6-3 vote regarding the Equal Protection Clause – as well as by a unanimous 9-0 concurrence, including even the most liberal justices, with respect to Title IX. “Title IX allows schools to provide separate women’s and men’s sports teams defined by biological sex, and West Virginia has permissibly maintained female sports for biological females consistent with Title IX,” the ruling states. “West Virginia and Idaho did not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by maintaining female sports teams for biological females,” the high court determined. What’s more, a person’s sex is clearly defined by the “immutable characteristic” of biology, not presumed identity, it explains: “The term ‘sex’ in Title IX, the Javits Amendment, and the Title IX regulations cannot plausibly be interpreted to refer to anything other than biological sex. The ordinary meaning of the term ‘sex’ at the time of enactment in the early 1970s was biological sex and not gender identity, particularly in the sports context. See, e.g., Frontiero v. Richardson, 411 U. S. 677, 686 (‘sex’ is ‘an immutable characteristic’). In addition, the Title IX regulations allowed separate sports teams precisely because of the inherent physical differences between biological men and biological women.” …. “The Equal Protection Clause does not prohibit the States from applying that same principle to all biological males, including those who identify as female. States are not required to conduct an individual-by-individual comparison of the physical and athletic capabilities of all biological males in order to satisfy intermediate scrutiny.” Even if female-identifying biological males who take puberty blockers or hormones do not retain physical advantages over biological females (a subject of ongoing debate), the ruling says it would not alter the equal protection conclusion. In the past six years, 27 states have enacted laws that maintain female sports for biological females. Additional states are expected to follow suit, in light of Tuesday’s opinion. The ruling does more than just affirm the right of states to pass laws prohibiting biological males from participating in female sports, however. Tuesday’s decision also lays the foundation for female athletes to file lawsuits contending that states are required, not just allowed, to ban trans athletes from women's sports in order to comply with Title IX. Title IX is a landmark federal civil rights law enacted in 1972 that prohibits sex-based discrimination in any school or education program that receives federal funding. The Equal Protection Clause is a core constitutional guarantee under Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. It mandates that no state shall deny any person within its jurisdiction "the equal protection of the laws." June 30th, 2026 12:55 PM Craig Bannister 295787 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/nicholas-spinnato/2026/06/30/msnows-rubin-scotus-better-female-athletes-who-villainize After more Supreme Court rulings on Tuesday, including a decision to allow states to ban biological men from playing in women’s sports, MS NOW legal reporter Lisa Rubin praised the written opinion for its words of “respect” for transgender athletes. But later, she said female athletes’ tactics in the controversy have ‘villainized’ the biological males in women’s sports. She even commented on young athletes' cheers outside the court, with a warning that their “feeling of victory” could bleed into “ostracizing.” After the decision was released, Rubin first said the court “fetishizes history,” as she explained how the court said the original text of Title IX was based on biological sex since it was written in 1972.   In more response to the SCOTUS decision on transgender athletes, MS NOW's Lisa Rubin said the court "fetishizes history" as she read the majority's interpretation of Title IX. pic.twitter.com/OkVBHp4B0X — Nick (@nspin310) June 30, 2026   But a few minutes after the initial discussion of the court’s interpretation of Title IX, Rubin returned to the actual written opinion in the cases released by the court. She said, “the majority wants to make sure that even as they're ruling against both of these athletes, they want to make sure that it's conveyed to the public that they don't mean any disrespect, and they don't always do something like this.” After she conveyed the Supreme Court’s respectful remarks in its decision, she read one part aloud which noted the athletes are mostly teenagers and people in their 20s as she continued to read, “Their desire to compete warrants respect. No student athlete on either side of the issue, whether a biological female or transgender, deserves to be ostracized or vilified.“ Rubin then turned to discuss the “women athletes in particular,” who she described as those “who are born female and present as female,” and said the court decision is different from athletes who, “sort of villainize some of the people who are like the plaintiffs in this case.”   In response to SCOTUS’s ruling that allows states to ban transgender athletes from sports, MS NOW's Lisa Rubin was struck by the written opinion and said it was different from “women athletes in particular” who “sort of villainize some of the people who are like the plaintiffs in… pic.twitter.com/2a6I2VKype — Nick (@nspin310) June 30, 2026   Fill-in host Antonia Hylton, after Rubin mentioned women’s athletes' views on transgender athletes, agreed and responded, “Yeah,” before Rubin continued. Rubin then mentioned the cheers outside the court from female athletes, who she now called “biologically female athletes who compete as women,” and said they are “feeling like they are victorious in the moment.” But she then said the feeling of victory could “bleed over” into something else: “That feeling of victory can very easily bleed over into the sort of ostracizing that the majority is talking about.” Rubin closed and continued to say she was struck by the court’s respect: I find it notable that they go out of their way to say, we're reaching this result on legal grounds. But make no mistake, the people who are living their lives as trans women and trans men, they deserve your respect. Their desire to play sports and compete on the playing field is genuine. That strikes me. That sticks with me. Apparently, according to MS NOW, blame should be placed on women’s athletes, like some of those cheering outside the court, because they “villainize” the biological males who competed in their sports. The transcript is below. Click "expand": MS NOW’s Money, Power, Politics w/ Stephanie Ruhle June 30, 2026 10:10:53 AM Eastern LISA RUBIN: Yeah. Well, I'm looking now at some of the aspects of the opinion. And so let's start with the majority opinion where they're interpreting Title IX first. That's the statute that forbids gender discrimination or other forms of discrimination in educational opportunity. And they say “the term sex in the 1972 Title IX statute and surrounding amendments and regulations cannot plausibly be interpreted to refer to anything other than biological sex, the ordinary meaning of the term sex at the time of enactment.” And let me just pause there for a second, because this is a court that fetishizes history. History at the time of enactment- UNKNOWN: What does that mean? RUBIN: - meaning they're obsessed with what something means at the time a statute is enacted, at the time a constitutional provision comes into play. So, whether it's we're talking about 1866, in the birthright citizenship context, or we're talking about 1972, when Title IX was passed, this court is always going to go back to what they consider the original meaning of a term at the time that a statute or a constitutional provision was put into play. (...) 10:20:07 AM Eastern LISA RUBIN: There's one thing here that Fallon Gallagher has pointed out to me that I think is so important and so smart, which is that the majority wants to make sure that even as they're ruling against both of these athletes, they want to make sure that it's conveyed to the public that they don't mean any disrespect, and they don't always do something like this. And so I want to read aloud from the ruling. “In so ruling, we emphasize one last point. Most of the biological female and transgender student athletes who are involved in transgender sports disputes around the country are teenagers or in their early 20s. Those student athletes want to play sports. Their desire to compete warrants respect. No student athlete on either side of the issue, whether a biological female or transgender, deserves to be ostracized or vilified.“ And I think that's a really interesting comment by the majority, because you have seen a number of athletes, women athletes in particular, who are born female and present as female, sort of villainize some of the people who are like the plaintiffs in this case.  ANTONIA HYLTON: Yeah RUBIN: And Fallon was talking earlier about a demonstration at the court and hearing a cheer from biologically female athletes who compete as women, feeling like they are victorious in this moment. That feeling of victory can very easily bleed over into the sort of ostracizing that the majority is talking about.  I find it notable that they go out of their way to say, we're reaching this result on legal grounds. But make no mistake, the people who are living their lives as trans women and trans men, they deserve your respect. Their desire to play sports and compete on the playing field is genuine. That strikes me. That sticks with me. (...) June 30th, 2026 12:51 PM Nicholas Spinnato 295786 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/mark-finkelstein/2026/06/30/morning-joes-glaude-250th-america-white-republic-greed Happy 4th to you, too, Eddie! MS NOW contributor and Princeton professor Eddie Glaude Jr appeared on Tuesday’s Morning Joe to offer his repetitively bleak take on America as the nation nears its 250th birthday. Glaude described America as a "white republic,” built on "greed and selfishness and grift and hatred." Invoking Moby Dick, he analogized the US to an ugly "white whale" that threatens to "choke out the life of the country.” Patriotism is racism. Co-host Mike Barnicle offered a cautious counterpoint, admitting he still sings the Star Spangled Banner at ballgames, tears up in certain cemeteries, and appreciates the American flag on a sunny day.  But Barnicle quickly added an obligatory qualification, claiming “we live under a Constitution where the words, ‘all men are created equal,’ was [sic] written by a slave owner.” (Note to Mike: that line comes from the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.) Barnicle then asked Glaude whether he sees “optimism at the end of this July 4th rainbow.” “No, no Mike I don’t. I don’t think I’ve ever teared up around patriotism. I don’t ever think I found joy in, in, in singing the Star Spangled Banner.” On @Morning_Joe: America a 'White Republic' Built on 'Greed, Selfishness, Grift, and Hatred' pic.twitter.com/bmuSpctaAN — Mark Finkelstein (@markfinkelstein) June 30, 2026 Instead of patriotism or optimism, Glaude offered what he called a “blue-soaked hope” [vote blue?] rooted not in America itself but in the “miraculous potential of human beings.” His role, he said, is to “bear witness with love and see how we make it to the other side.” Nevertheless, "the country has this tremendously burdensome past that has it by the throat in so many ways."  Mika Brzezinski closed the segment by embracing Glaude's cynical view of America: “We really appreciate what you’ve had to share this morning. I reflect your feelings.” Glaude’s appearance fits a well-established liberal media pattern of platforming voices who emphasize America’s original sin and persistent “ugliness,” while sidelining its unmatched progress in expanding liberty, opportunity, and inclusion.  With this brand of rhetoric shaping students in Princeton’s African American Studies department, it’s little wonder that a notable Princeton alum, Michelle Obama, famously declared that she wasn’t “really proud of my country” until her husband’s 2008 nomination. As the nation prepares to mark 250 years since the Declaration of Independence, Morning Joe offered viewers another helping of grievance over gratitude from the liberal-media crowd. Here's the transcript. MS NOW Morning Joe 6/30/26 6:59 am EDT EDDIE GLAUDE JR.: The divided soul of America. And that has been the case since our founding. We've imagined ourselves at once as a beacon of freedom, and as a white republic. And that white republic takes the form where greed and selfishness and grift and hatred overwhelm, in so many ways, our attempt to overwhelm and overrun our most basic principles. And that divided soul, in so many ways, is in full view in our current moment. And a choice has to be made, it seems to me. Who are we going to be? Who are we as Americans? Who are we going to be? Are we going to lean into the value of the diversity of this nation, of the principles that make us or can make us who we claim to be? Or are we going to double down on the ugliness, that white whale that Melville wrote about, and let that, in so many ways, choke out the life of the country? I believe in this 250th, we have to make a choice. America, in so many ways, has to leave behind this guaranteed innocence, Willie, and confront who we actually are so that we can release ourselves into being otherwise. Otherwise, we're not going to make it to the other side of this madness, it seems to me. MIKE BARNICLE: You know, Eddie, I have to tell you, I still sing the Star Spangled Banner at ball games. I still tear up when I walk through certain cemeteries. I still enjoy seeing an American flag flapping in the wind on a wonderful, clear, sunny day.But I also know that we live under a Constitution where the words, "all men are created equal," was written by a slave owner. But my question to you is, do you see optimism at the end of this July 4th rainbow? GLAUDE: No, no Mike, I don't. And it comes about, I think that that orientation follows from, from my own formation. I don't think I've ever teared up around patriotism. I don't ever think I found joy in singing the Star Spangled Banner. It has something to do with the tradition out of which I've come. The way in which I have had to live and the people that I come from have had to live the contradiction of America itself, even as we have struggled for its promise. So I'm not optimistic. You know, I have a blue-soaked hope, my friend, a blue-soaked hope, and that is that the world is what it is. It's ugly. The country has this tremendously burdensome past that has it by the throat in so many ways. But, you know, human beings can be monstrous, but they can also be miracles. And that faith in the miraculous potential of human beings is what I have, not in the abstraction. So I bring the fullness of my tradition to bear in this moment. And so what I need to do is just simply bear witness with love and see how we make it to the other side, my friend. MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Author Eddie Glaude Jr., thank you very much. We really appreciate what you've had to share this morning. I reflect your feelings. We have challenges. Miracles do happen as well. So, here we are. June 30th, 2026 12:06 PM Mark Finkelstein 295780 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tim-graham/2026/06/30/stretch-politifact-oddly-claims-ossoff-wasnt-deciding-vote-50-50-tie Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) is an easy Exhibit A in the tilt at PolitiFact. In his first Senate run in 2020, PolitiFact’s Tom Kertscher threw a “Pants On Fire” flag at his opponent Sen. David Perdue for labeling Ossoff a “socialist.” Ossoff was endorsed by Bernie Sanders (and Ossoff welcomed it.) And yet, Ossoff can smear Trump as a "totalitarian farce" with no checking. On Monday, PolitiFact threw a "False" at Ossoff's current Republican opponent, Rep. Mike Collins:  U.S. Sen. Jon Ossoff “cast the deciding vote for the inflation disaster,” referring to the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. PolitiFact newbie Ben Brasch really had to stretch reality to come to Ossoff's defense. The Senate vote on the "Inflation Reduction Act" was 50-50, so if he had voted against it, that vote would decide it. He was a deciding vote. But no, everybody blamed Kamala:  Ossoff supported the Inflation Reduction Act. Every Democratic vote was needed, but he was not the "deciding vote." Harris, as vice president, came in to break the tie.  Despite its name, the law had little effect on inflation. Inflation had peaked by the time it passed, and many provisions required phasing in over several years. We rate the statement False. PolitiFact noted the "American Rescue Plan Act" was seen as the inflation driver -- but he failed to note Ossoff boasted he was a "decisive vote" vote for that! Naturally, like good Democrats, PolitiFact added Democrat-excusing lingo: "Economists assigned more blame to post-pandemic supply chain backups and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. " In the Brasch piece, he linked to PolitiFact bragging that it's repeatedly nitpicked Republicans on the "deciding vote" language.  June 30th, 2026 10:36 AM Tim Graham 295783 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/alex-christy/2026/06/30/oliver-warns-america-going-back-jim-crow-era HBO’s John Oliver lamented on Sunday’s Last Week Tonight that Republicans in southern states are getting in on the redistricting battle that is taking place across the whole country. According to him, Republican efforts are on track to bring the country “back to the Jim Crow era.” During his lengthy ramblings on redistricting, Oliver brought up a recent Supreme Court ruling that set the Southern redistricting efforts in motion, “Yep, from the six justices who brought you such banger decisions as ‘The president is untouchable,’ ‘Your uterus is our legal property,' and ‘Oops! All smog’ came a brand new decision on voting rights. Very basically, under the Voting Rights Act, minority voters could previously challenge a map if it diluted minority representation in their state regardless of whether that was the intention.” Oliver then mocked the plaintiffs in the case for using the legalese that is required for a Supreme Court brief, “It was to comply with that law that Louisiana drew a map that contained two majority-black congressional districts. But in that Supreme Court case a group of 12 self-described ‘Non-African American’ voters claimed that their 'personal dignity’ had been injured by the map, which they said racially stigmatized, stereotyped, and maligned’ them. And while I do appreciate them specifying they were ‘Non-African American,’ honey that was already clear. ‘This map hurt my feelings and I want to talk to your manager’ more than covered it.    During his lengthy rant on redistricting, John Oliver laments, "from the six justices who brought you such banger decisions as 'The president is untouchable', 'Your uterus is our legal property' and 'Oops! All smog' came a brand new decision on voting rights. Very basically,… pic.twitter.com/muQuuRBsWJ — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) June 30, 2026   Moving on to Justice Samuel Alito, Oliver continued attacking, “Yet the Court sided with them, with Alito writing that going forward, anyone challenging a map could only prevail if they had strong evidence the state intentionally drew its districts to afford minority voters less opportunity because of their race. Basically, unless state lawmakers were shouting out slurs while drawing the lines, they were going to be in the clear.” A bit later, Oliver played a clip of Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry defending his state’s efforts by pointing to Martin Luther King Jr.’s famous quote about judging people by their character instead of their race. He sarcastically reacted, “Wow. That is powerful stuff, Landry. You know, that actually reminds me of another Martin Luther King quote when he said, ‘Hey, can white people please learn more than two of my fucking quotes?’" Cherry-picking from history, Oliver continued, “But for the record, history shows that without majority-black districts, black candidates in Louisiana have basically no chance of getting elected. In fact, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama have never elected a black representative outside a majority-black district—and no black candidate has been elected to statewide office in Louisiana since Reconstruction.” Of course, Oliver omits how Republican Sen. Tim Scott not only has been elected to statewide office in South Carolina, but was also a member of the House before becoming a senator. GOP Rep. Byron Donalds also represents a majority-white district.   Later, Oliver cherry-picks Louisiana to suggest this means the end of black candidates winning, "But for the record, history shows that without majority-black districts, black candidates in Louisiana have basically no chance of getting elected. In fact, Louisiana, Mississippi,… pic.twitter.com/J3wjkhDEiD — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) June 30, 2026   Later still, Oliver lamented, “Everything you've seen so far only addresses what was able to be done before the midterms. But it won't end there. In the coming years, Republicans in Southern states could ultimately eliminate majority-minority districts altogether, taking America back to the Jim Crow era, when there were no black representatives in Southern states with sizable black populations.” Again, Oliver just ignored counterexamples. Sen. Raphael Warnock, whom he presumably supports, represents an entire Southern state in the Senate.   Oliver also warns, "Also everything you've seen so far only addresses what was able to be done before the midterms. But it won't end there. In the coming years, Republicans in Southern states could ultimately eliminate majority-minority districts altogether, taking America back… pic.twitter.com/I6yittr2cL — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) June 30, 2026   However, that did not stop Oliver from adding, “And there'll likely be major impacts on other levels of government, too, from city councils to school boards to state legislatures. And for those who fought so hard for their voting rights, watching them get stripped away this fast is brutal because it's worth remembering the progress that's currently being undone, happened in living memory for many.” The Supreme Court has never had a legal problem with partisan gerrymandering. What it has finally done is treat all Democratic voters equally. Nobody’s right to vote is being taken away, but in an actual democracy, your preferred candidate does not always win. Here is a transcript for the June 28 show: HBO Last Week Tonight with John Oliver 6/28/2026 11:37 PM ET JOHN OLIVER: Yep, from the six justices who brought you such banger decisions as "The president is untouchable," "Your uterus is our legal property," and "Oops! All smog" came a brand new decision on voting rights. Very basically, under the Voting Rights Act, minority voters could previously challenge a map if it diluted minority representation in their state regardless of whether that was the intention. It was to comply with that law that Louisiana drew a map that contained two majority-black congressional districts. But in that Supreme Court case a group of 12 self-described "Non-African American" voters claimed that their "personal dignity" had been injured by the map, which they said racially stigmatized, stereotyped, and maligned" them. And while I do appreciate them specifying they were "Non-African American," honey that was already clear. "This map hurt my feelings and I want to talk to your manager" more than covered it.  Yet the Court sided with them, with Alito writing that going forward, anyone challenging a map could only prevail if they had strong evidence the state intentionally drew its districts to afford minority voters less opportunity because of their race. Basically, unless state lawmakers were shouting out slurs while drawing the lines, they were going to be in the clear. … OLIVER: Wow. That is powerful stuff, Landry. You know, that actually reminds me of another Martin Luther King quote when he said, "Hey, can white people please learn more than two of my fucking quotes?" But for the record, history shows that without majority-black districts, black candidates in Louisiana have basically no chance of getting elected. In fact, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama have never elected a black representative outside a majority-black district—and no black candidate has been elected to statewide office in Louisiana since Reconstruction. … OLIVER: And when you take this whole redistricting back-and-forth together, it will, as I said earlier— probably give Republicans up to 12 seats in the House which doesn't mean they'll automatically win the House in November. But it makes the margin for Democrats meaningfully smaller. Also, everything you've seen so far only addresses what was able to be done before the midterms. But it won't end there. In the coming years, Republicans in Southern states could ultimately eliminate majority-minority districts altogether, taking America back to the Jim Crow era, when there were no black representatives in Southern states with sizable black populations. And there'll likely be major impacts on other levels of government, too, from city councils to school boards to state legislatures. And for those who fought so hard for their voting rights, watching them get stripped away this fast is brutal because it's worth remembering the progress that's currently being undone, happened in living memory for many. June 30th, 2026 9:56 AM Alex Christy 295782 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/cnsnews/craig-bannister/2026/06/30/leftist-cable-news-viewers-reject-trumps-iran-deal-approve Voters who rely on left-wing cable news don’t approve of President Donald Trump’s ceasefire deal with Iran – until they’re told what’s in it – results of a new McLaughlin Poll show, highlighting the harmful influence of bias by omission. The national survey of U.S. likely midterm voters, conducted June 17-23, asked the following question: “From what you have seen, read or heard in the news do you approve or disapprove of the ceasefire deal that President Trump has made with Iran?” A majority of all voters (51%-34%) said they support what they’d “seen, read, or heard,” as did an even stronger majority of voters who are prone to watch right-of-center cable news (72%-17%). Voters who don’t regularly watch cable news favored the deal by a 42%-36% margin. In contrast, a majority of voters who regularly watch left-of-center cable news said they oppose the agreement (54%-35%). However, when left-of-center cable viewers were asked about individual provisions in the U.S.-Iran ceasefire deal, they approved – by a wide margin. Fully 73% of left-of-center cable watchers said they approve of the requirement that Iran agree to never produce nuclear weapons and allow American and international inspections to verify Iran’s compliance. This sentiment was shared by 83% of right-of-center cable viewers and 75% of those who don’t watch cable news. Likewise, regarding the ceasefire agreement’s requirement that Iran stop funding international terrorism against Israel and other nations, 73% of left-of-center cable news watchers voiced approval. Approval was similarly strong among those who either watch right-of-center cable (76%) or don’t regularly watch cable news (75%). The survey’s results reveal “an important lesson about media consumption and political messaging,” Pollsters John McLaughlin and Jim McLaughlin observed in an article discussing their findings: “These differences strongly suggest that many Americans are not hearing the most popular elements of the agreement.” The importance of voters being, not just accurately – but, also fully – informed about issues, such as the U.S.-Iran ceasefire agreement, continues to increase as the November midterm elections approach. Nearly two-thirds (65%) of all likely midterm voters regularly consume cable news each week, including 72% of Republicans and 67% of Democrats. Only 55% of Independents said they regularly watch any cable news, however. June 30th, 2026 9:27 AM Craig Bannister 295781 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/nicholas-fondacaro/2026/06/30/mrc-petitions-fcc-bar-renewal-abc-owned-broadcast-licenses In a petition filed Monday with the Federal Communications Commission, the Media Research Center expanded its offensive against Disney and ABC. Speaking on behalf of seven petitioners, MRC President David Bozell made the case that ABC had wronged them and the American people by attempting to influence elections for their own political interests, the spreading of misinformation, and the promotion of political violence. The MRC contended this was a violation of their broadcast license, thus it should bar the licenses from being renewed. “Walt Disney’s American Broadcasting Company (ABC) has First Amendment rights. It does not have a right to public spectrum,” Bozell wrote. “Because of ABC’s continued and sustained abuse of the licenses subject to the current review, its notorious efforts to improperly influence national elections, and its willful engagement in misinformation and the promotion of violence, Petitioners request that these licenses not be renewed.” The petition noted that a critical part of being granted the privilege of using the broadcast spectrum, which is managed by the federal government, was that broadcasters were required to act with care and promised to operate in the best interests of the public. The MRC makes the case that that promise was willfully broken and trampled on; not just by ABC proper, but also by the eight local affiliates they own and which rebroadcast their content: Unfortunately, ABC has broken its promise and not acted in the public interest. Instead, it has used the spectrum possessed by WABC-TV and its sister ABC subsidiaries in a manner that has injured Petitioners, and the American public at large.  ABC’s eight owned-and-operated stations include WABC-TV (New York), KFSN-TV (Fresno), KABC-TV (Los Angeles), KGO-TV (San Francisco), WLS-TV (Chicago), WTVD (Durham), WPVI-TV (Philadelphia), and KTRK-TV (Houston). They have used public spectrum to suppress news coverage of the most critical stories of our day; to engage in electioneering and relentless political bias; to excuse, minimize, and even justify the epidemic of political violence; and to peddle misinformation and defamation. It’s worth noting that most affiliates with ABC in their call letters were actually own by ABC. “If WABC-TV and its sister subsidiaries’ licenses are not renewed, ABC will continue to be able to exercise its free speech rights. It will be free to engage the American public as a partisan activist group through avenues not subsidized by the American people,” Bozell added. “In addition, the American people and their government will be protected from a media conglomerate that wants to unlawfully use public resources for its own political schemes.”  In requesting the FCC to not renew ABC’s licenses, the petitioners informed the commission that even without access to the broadcast spectrum, “It has numerous, non-public spectrum avenues to express whatever opinions it wishes.” June 30th, 2026 9:00 AM Nicholas Fondacaro 295776 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/jorge-bonilla/2026/06/30/cbs-exposes-european-climate-arrogance-face-deadly-heat-wave It is not often that a report inadvertently and brutally exposes the left’s disregard for human life in service of their policy goals. But this report on the European heat wave does precisely that. Watch the report in its entirety as aired on CBS Evening News on Monday, June 29th, 2026: WATCH: CBS exposes European climate arrogance and steadfast refusal to adopt A/C in the face of a deadly heat wave, TONY DOKOUPIL: We are launching a new series here tonight, something we are calling The Big Question- the first one inspired by our news of more than a thousand… pic.twitter.com/nhTiVJYrLM — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) June 30, 2026 TONY DOKOUPIL: We are launching a new series here tonight, something we are calling The Big Question- the first one inspired by our news of more than a thousand heat-related deaths in Europe. The continent has more heat-related deaths per capita than anywhere else on the planet but in fact fewer hot days. So why is the heat in Europe so much deadlier than everywhere else? He is Leigh Kiniry with The Big Question. LEIGH KINIRY: In Europe, there's a perfect storm. The oldest population on any continent that's warming the fastest. France's record heat last week is linked to roughly 1000 deaths of mostly elderly. INE VANDECASTEELE: All climate related impacts on hazards, heat is the biggest killer. KINIRY: European officials are calling for change, but not the kind that may seem obvious. Install air conditioning, especially for vulnerable people, and save lives. Why is that not a solution in Europe? VANDECASTEELE: My honest response is I don't think that should be the solution anywhere. In the longer term, what happens is installing more air conditioning actually emits more heat into our environment so it will actually increase the speed of warming. KINIRY: It's also more expensive. Energy prices are much higher in Europe. Governments find other ways to cool historic and densely populated cities. In Rome, wearable technology is distributed to monitor the elderly who are by far in the most danger.  A recent survey in France said one in six people they surveyed said they'd rather suffer for the sake of the environment. Does that surprise you? VANDECASTEELE: No. We’re not doing this for us. We’re doing this for the future generations. KINIRY: Leigh Kiniry, CBS News, London. The Big Obvious Answer to The Big Question is that Eurocrats refuse to allow the adoption of air conditioning across the Old Continent, even as thousands of people die of heat-related illnesses. Over a thousand dead across the CURRENT heat wave is staggering, which makes Eurocrat rhetoric more maddening. This exchange is revelatory: LEIGH KINIRY: A recent survey in France said one in six people they surveyed said they'd rather suffer for the sake of the environment. Does that surprise you? INE VANDECASTEELE: No. We’re not doing this for us. We’re doing this for the future generations. There seems to be a script, because a French rapid response account for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs posted the same thing: We're not banning A/C. We're making sure future summers need it less. https://t.co/18cl2RpRtU — French Response (@FrenchResponse) June 29, 2026 Meanwhile, thousands continue to die in furtherance of climate utopia. When explaining why the Europeans don’t adopt A/C, Kiniry cited higher energy prices. However, Kiniry fails to mention the staggering climate taxes levied on European energy. Additionally, Kiniry omits some of the auto-inflicted loss of capacity on the continent, such as the Germany’s decision to shut down their nuclear energy plants. That own-goal that left them reliant on foreign energy, which became prohibitively expensive at the outset of Russia’s war against Ukraine. Somehow, these facts get left off the reports.  The report’s exposures of European climate policy as both callous and ineffective are not intentional. But they nonetheless perform a valuable service inasmuch as they expose their viewers to the logical conclusions of leftist policy- thousands dead so as not to disturb the climate.   June 30th, 2026 12:18 AM Jorge Bonilla 295779 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tim-graham/2026/06/29/newsbusters-podcast-jake-tappers-haitian-danger-hypocrisy In January 2018, the Democrats came out of a meeting with President Trump at the White House complaining that Trump used the term “s—thole countries” to describe poor nations who caused a lot of illegal immigration into America, like Haiti. We counted CNN saying the word “s—thole” 195 times in a single day to stoke outrage. Back then, Jake Tapper gave a softball interview to comedian Conan O’Brien who made a special for TBS (same company) mocking Trump by going to Haiti and telling everyone what a beautiful place it was. So it was interesting on Sunday when CNN State of the Union host Jake Tapper began lecturing Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin on how much Haiti right now is a….well, don’t say it. But it would be cruel to send any Haitian immigrants back. Under President Biden, they were putting Haitians on planes and granting them amnesty before they landed. Mullin offered a classic response: "Is there a question in that?" MRC Business Associate Editor Joseph Vazquez and our evening-news and Sunday-show specialist Jorge Bonilla reviewed this sorry scene, recalling that some liberals in 2018 said America was the "s---hole country" because Trump was running it. This matches somehow with Joy Reid winning our Worst Media Quote of the Week last week for claiming black people don't celebrate the Fourth of July. Since Trump wanted the beautify the mall for the big national anniversary, the media mocked the return of algae in the Reflecting Pool between the Washington monuments. The Washington Post offered a sob story titled “Why Trump’s algae problem is much bigger than the Reflecting Pool.” Reporter Sarah Kaplan editorialized that Trump “has overlooked the real cause of unsightly — and often dangerous — algal blooms,” which of course was “pollution and climate change.” Nicolle Wallace may be popular among MS NOW viewers, and that might be because she says remarkably untrue things that please the so-called progressives. On Friday’s Deadline: White House, she boasted about how Barack Obama is still much more popular than President Trump, and she uncorked several whoppers, like Trump has “literally muzzled” half the media, and Obama had “no scandals,” no algae in the Reflecting Pool, and no wars. Enjoy the podcast below:      June 29th, 2026 10:32 PM Tim Graham 295777 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/nicholas-spinnato/2026/06/29/after-downplaying-morning-joe-spends-multiple-segments-rise After they minimized the influence of Democratic Socialists on the Democratic Party the week prior, Monday’s Morning Joe spent over two segments, elapsing over 20 minutes, on controversies related to the Democratic Socialists of America. Their first segment focused on the controversies surrounding radical DSA candidate Darializa Avila Chevalier, as co-host Mika Brzezinski bashed Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) for “gaslighting” about the situation. Later, the final segment of the show, they discussed the harassment of leftist Democratic House candidate and current California State Senator Scott Weiner, as ADL chief Jonathan Greenblatt said the Democrat’s anti-Semitism can be defined by three letters: “DSA.” After a clip of NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani played from an ABC softball interview, Brzezinski detailed the controversies of Mamdani-endorsed Chevalier, mostly pertaining to old social media posts where she “expressed support for abolishing police, prisons, and borders, as well as seizing private property,” among other things. Brzezinski shifted into a clip of Murphy on Sunday’s Meet The Press, where, she said, he “appeared to dodge” Chevalier’s past comments.   In response to Sen. Murphy’s non-answer on the controversies of Darializa Avila Chevalier, Morning Joe co-host Mika Brzezinski accused the senator of gaslighting: “We both love Chris Murphy. We think he's a great guy and serves our country. But don't gaslight people." https://t.co/XhSsQrcYay pic.twitter.com/ExvsgcDcrn — Nick (@nspin310) June 29, 2026   She read an X post from her co-host and husband Joe Scarborough, who did not appear on Monday’s show, where Scarborough called on Democrats to “call out crazy,” before she tore into Murphy for “gaslighting”: And one of the most frustrating things about Trump's first presidency and his second, and folks who chose to vote for Trump the first time and then vote for him a second time, and then act shocked about the cruelty of the mass deportations, or to act shocked about the tariffs, or to say, well, I haven't been watching the news. I don't know about that one. That is like the most gaslighting experience one can ever, ever see throughout this entire political cycle or cycles. Because pretending you haven't seen it is impossible. It's an out. And now to see a Democrat doing it. And I like - we both love Chris Murphy. We think he's a great guy and serves our country. But don't gaslight people. At the end of the show, a discussion began on the harassment of California politician Scott Weiner, known for his radical transgender policies, at a transgender rally. After a clip played of Weiner being yelled at by protesters, Brzezinski exclaimed, “Whoa.” Greenblatt was brought on as a panelist to discuss the Weiner incident, and remarked the DSA was the Democrats’ antisemitism problem: “The Democratic Party has an anti-Semitism problem, and I can define it in three letters: the DSA.“   In the last segment of Morning Joe, ADL Chief Joanthan Greenblatt said, "The democratic party has an anti-semitism problem, and I can define it in three letters: the DSA." The segment came after they once again focused on a DSA-related topic, as they discussed the incident… https://t.co/OD78EkVDKe pic.twitter.com/XtyhaXe2QA — Nick (@nspin310) June 29, 2026   At the end of the segment, former Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin asked Greenbelt, “How much of this is about money?” She continued: “The idea that we spend billions of U.S. Taxpayer dollars investing in this government and the Israeli government, that is a source of a tremendous amount of tension with American citizens who, to Barnicle’s point, are watching what that money they believe is used to kill children.” Abedin’s question to Greenblatt represented the reality of the rise of the DSA. While not every Democrat may be completely DSA-oriented, some, like Huma Abedin, seemed to take similar positions on some topics, like Israel. For a show that downplayed the rise of the DSA after the NYC elections, it seemed like they realized their newfound influence on the Democrat Party was too big to ignore. MS NOW’s Morning Joe June 29, 2026 6:12:39 AM Eastern MIKA BRZEZINSKI: But Chevalier has been facing scrutiny over previously articulated stances and numerous social media posts that she has since deleted. And her appearance at a rally the day after Hamas' attack on Israel on October 7th, 2023, where attendees reportedly suggested the attack was justified.  In a now-deleted social media post between 2018 and 2022, multiple posts, Chevalier also used expletives to refer to former Vice President Kamala Harris and the Democratic National Committee, and expressed support for abolishing police, prisons, and borders, as well as seizing private property and calling into question Israel's right to exist. Other reports noted she called former president Joe Biden a rapist and disparaged white people in some of her posts.  Chevalier has said she regrets the posts, adding that she is, quote, “grown considerably since writing them.” Some Democrats have pushed back against her past comments, while others, like Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut, appeared to dodge these concerns. [Cuts to clip] SEN. CHRIS MURPHY (D-CT): [On 6/28’s Meet the Press] Yeah, well, I mean, I'm not super familiar with that race. All I'm saying is that this party has to have a real contest of ideas. And I just don't think that our defense of incrementalism has worked.  [Cuts back to live] So, I don't mind a contest of ideas. And I just don't know that we have had it to the extent that voters have been satisfied. Listen, it's no secret voters aren't super happy with establishment Democrats or establishment Republicans these days. I will say, though, what binds together, I think every Democratic candidate that is running, including the ones in New York, is that they are standing up to protect American democracy. And right now, the biggest threat to this country are not a handful of House candidates in New York. BRZEZINSKI: So [laughs] Joe reacted to that response, posting on X quote, “Yeah. Well, I mean, I'm not super familiar with that race. This is what frightened Republicans do when confronted with the horrid things Donald Trump has said. Now, democratic senators are saying this about a congressional candidate who accused Joe Biden of rape. Stop. Now.” His memo to Democrats: “Call out crazy. Even when it's on your side, especially when it's on your side, voters will reward you for being better than Republicans.” I have to say, JMart, this is going to be an interesting issue, actually, for candidates on both sides of the aisle, because they're now many of them are old enough to have passed tweets and ridiculous statements, and voters are going to have to decide what the line is. What's the deal breaker? In this case, I think it's pretty clear. Some of these statements are complete deal breakers, and it's not hard to say. It's just not hard to say. And one of the most frustrating things about Trump's first presidency and his second, and folks who chose to vote for Trump the first time and then vote for him a second time, and then act shocked about the cruelty of the mass deportations, or to act shocked about the tariffs, or to say, well, I haven't been watching the news. I don't know about that one. That is like the most gaslighting experience one can ever, ever see throughout this entire political cycle or cycles. Because pretending you haven't seen it is impossible. It's an out. And now to see a Democrat doing it. And I like - we both love Chris Murphy. We think he's a great guy and serves our country. But don't gaslight people. I mean, this story is out there. And what is rehema? What is the line of past tweets being deal breakers? (...) 7:50:18 AM Eastern BRZEZINSKI: But on Friday, as State Senator Wiener, who is also openly gay and Jewish, was on his way to a Pride Shabbat service led by a trans rabbi, he was run out of San Francisco's annual trans rights rally by protesters, who swarmed him and screamed at him, accusing him of endorsing genocide in Gaza. We have video of the incident. And a warning: some viewers might find the images disturbing. [Cuts to video] PROTESTOR: You’re wonderful for trans people. You've been terrible. And you've been terrible -  you've been terrible - you've been terrible on Gaza. You do not belong here anymore, Scott. [Cuts back to live] BRZEZINSKI: Whoa. The Mayor of San Francisco reacted to the incident in a statement on social media, writing in, quote unquote, “the language directed at Senator Wiener was targeted, hateful and anti-semitic. In San Francisco, we welcome disagreement and respectful dialog around issues many of us feel passionately about, but we cannot allow harassment and threats of violence.” What is going on here? (...) 7:55:50 AM Eastern  JONATHAN GREENBLATT: Look, the Democratic Party. And as you know, I worked in the Obama White house. I worked in the Clinton white house. The democratic party has an anti-semitism problem, and I can define it in three letters: the DSA. The DSA, the Democratic Socialists of America. They should call it, you know, discrimination and stereotyping and anti-semitism. And I say that because we see this as the common thread that seems to link this party. And they're activists, they're not Democrats. But an obsession with the Jewish state seems to be the common denominator when you look at these candidates.  Now, look, I want to be super clear. There's problems with anti-semitism on the right as well. I'm not suggesting that this is only a problem on the Left. But we see this again and again and again. We see this in these congressional races last week. And by the way, we're seeing it right here in the city of New York with the largest Jewish population in the world. And we can talk about Mayor Mamdani, if you like, because he has been gaslighting our community for years, saying he believes in protecting the Jewish people, but then refusing to do so in ways that all other normal politicians in the past have done. So, yeah. Mika, you put it well. We have a problem. The democratic party has an anti-semitism problem. It is the DSA, and it needs to deal with this in order to make its Jewish, you know, members and Americans across the country feel safe. (...) 7:57:23 AM Eastern DAVE ARONBERG: Mika, good to be with you and Jonathan. I do, and I have an interesting perspective because I was classmates with Scott Wiener back in law school, and I knew him back then. He was known as a principled campus advocate for LGBTQ rights. And I do think that Scott compromised some of those principles when he did a sudden 180 for political reasons and adopted the blood libel that Israel's War against Hamas was a genocide.  But Scott learned the hard way, Mika, that the alligator is always hungry. You can feed it, and you can appease it, but eventually it's going to bite your face off. And you can sacrifice your principles to the anti-semitic mob, but it doesn't make them hate you any less. I mean, his position on Gaza is now indistinguishable from their own position. So, of course,, what you saw in that video was anti-semitism, because otherwise it doesn't make any sense. They berated and chased out a gay Progressive lawmaker because he's a Jew who simply believes that Israel has a right to exist. Meanwhile, Israel is the only country in the Middle East where a trans March like that could happen. (...) 8:01:21 AM Eastern HUMA ABEDIN: Jonathan, can I ask you, because so many of these candidates who are running for office are the Senate candidates in Michigan as well. How much of this is about money?  The idea that we spend billions of U.S. Taxpayer dollars investing in this government and the Israeli government, that is a source of a tremendous amount of tension with American citizens who, to Barnicle’s point, watching what that money they believe is used to kill children. GREENBLATT: It's a fair question, Huma. You know, these issues from your time at the State Department, probably better than I do. If you look at the foreign aid budget and you look at the foreign defense spending budget, it's actually quite small as a percentage of overall U.S. Dollars. And you look at we spent a lot of money in Egypt, right?  ABEDIN: We certainly do.  GREENBLATT: That's a country that persecutes gay people, persecutes religious minorities, etc. - ABEDIN: We can criticize that government too. GREENBLATT: We do, but we don't. So the question we have to ask is, why the obsession with Israel, even before October the 7th, why were there people cheering on October the 7th here in New York City, after Jewish people, Israelis, were massacred, raped, and brutalized? I don't understand it. Until you start to peel it back. Look, we need to recognize that anti-semitism has been around for a long time. Again, the perceived misdeeds of the Israeli government or the Israeli military create a convenient target. But again, I don't think it's right to hold people collectively responsible.  And again, government dollars may get spent with this ally, but we spend them all around the world. I don't see people protesting the Egyptian government, the Saudi government, the Pakistani government. It seems to be that Israel is the only one that's held to this kind of double standard. That's the issue. (...) June 29th, 2026 7:16 PM Nicholas Spinnato 295773 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/culture/justine-brooke-murray/2026/06/29/museum-poor-choices In an attempt to guilt trip Americans into supporting the murder of pre-born children, Planned Parenthood has enlisted their twenty something year old “influencers” to win over hearts and minds on social media.  Come tour Planned Parenthood’s Museum of Poor Choices with me! pic.twitter.com/LdZLHKFuUX — Justine Brooke Murray (@Justine_Brooke) June 17, 2026 The activist-company has set up an abortion fun house, where they take you on a tour of victimhood and death. It can’t get cringier than this…  “The first room lists services Planned Parenthood’s health centers provide,” announced the influencer in the video. She named “gender affirming care,” aka, mutilation as casually as a hair dresser would list the types of blowouts you can get. “When people hear about Planned Parenthood, they may not realize you can get cancer screenings, PAP tests, annual wellness exams…” she added. “And more…” like killing your child!  In another room, you can watch a video of real-life customers boasting how the business helped them abort responsibility, with zero guilt attached. The “influencer” then takes you down a long corridor plastered with sad quotes and manipulated statistics, meant to make you feel sorry that you ever doubted the eugenicist-founded company’s right to take the lives of others.  With the same cadence as a Sarah McLachlan commercial, she displays each pro-abortion artifact like she’s showing pictures of suffering puppies who are about to be put down. Of course, these abortion-enthusaists would likely have much more sympathy for those dogs than the children who are ALSO being put down.  At the end of the corridor is a large sign that reads “MY BODY IS MY OWN.”  They seem to forget a baby’s body is also his or her own.    June 29th, 2026 6:33 PM Justine Brooke Murray 295775 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/curtis-houck/2026/06/29/abc-whines-scotus-case-allows-trump-stick-his-fingers-independent While the Supreme Court didn’t hand down the birthright citizenship or transgenderism opinions on Monday, the government agencies case landed with the Trump v. Slaughter case, largely allowing him to fire appointees to boards overseeing government agencies. This left Disney-owned ABC News in a tizzy, fearing they would no longer “be independent, protected from presidential interference,” and President Trump can now “stick his fingers in there” and “dismantle” them. First, on a network special report, Supreme Court reporter Devin Dwyer lamented the Court turned away from Congress’s desire to have agencies such as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) “insulated from politics, only allowing people to be fired for cause.” Pitching in on the main network, ABC News Live host Kyra Phillips told virulent Trump-hater Rachel Scott that “clearly, this is going to give President Trump the ability to dismantle other agencies.” ABC News Special Report bemoaned Monday’s SCOTUS decision about federal agency boards means Trump will have “the ability to dismantle other agencies” except for the Federal Reserve, which will remain free of politicization...for now” pic.twitter.com/AItrDIWwS6 — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) June 29, 2026 Scott concurred in the laments that appointees to other “federal agencies...could potentially be at risk here and most likely be going away.” In contrast, she said a separate ruling against Trump about the Federal Reserve would keep them free of “politicization...for now.” Continuing after the Special Report on the aforementioned ABC News Live, Dwyer told morning host Diane Macedo this “sweeping decision” could lead to “a major overhaul” of everything from “the NTSB to the Federal Trade Commission, Federal Election Commission, Securities and Exchange Commission,” all of which “touch all aspects of American life, setting regulations, doing enforcement of those regulations.” ABC’s Supreme Court reporter Devin Dwyer complains the Slaughter case means federal agencies will no longer “be independent, protected from presidential interference,” and President Trump can “stick his fingers in there and design those agencies as he wants” vs. letting “subject… pic.twitter.com/OSnwzikodH — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) June 29, 2026 Dwyer then leveled his biggest gripes and machinations about Trump “stick[ing] his fingers in” agencies when they should be “independent” (and thus unaccountable to the people): [T]hey are helmed by Republicans and Democrats. In many cases, they were designed to be independent, protected from presidential interference. But what Chief Justice John Roberts said today, in this opinion, is that the President does have the have the power under the Constitution to stick his fingers in there and design those agencies as he wants, that it was a violation of the separation of powers for Congress to prevent that. He concluded by huffing, “It really spells the end now of the idea that we have agencies in our government meant to be independent, meant to be bipartisan, meant to be staffed by subject matter experts, and a huge win for conservatives here, Diane, who had hoped for this separation for quite some time and fought for it in addition to President Trump.” “Subject matter experts” free from, again, any criticism. Legal contributor James Sample was also somewhat crestfallen (click “expand”): MACEDO: James, how do the justices differentiate between these two officials, and what sort of precedent does this set? SAMPLE: Well, at oral argument, Diane, there was much discussion about the idea that the Federal Reserve is a unique agency, that it has a unique historical pedigree. On the other hand, it had the exact same for cause removal protections from the exact same statutes that the other agencies with, who also had independent agency commissions had. And so the carve out for this exception is arguably inconsistent, but arguably sensitive to the core nature of monetary policy. And just to underscore Devin’s point, Diane, just how big a deal this case — the Slaughter case — really is in terms of the independent agencies, unless you’re over 90 years old, then this marks a fundamental structural change in the organization of almost every government agency that exists. So, in the short term, it is a victory for President Trump. But in the long term, it’s really a victory for the President, regardless of party. And this will produce some significant and big swings on matters of policy that affect everyday Americans over the years. Shifting over to CBS’s streaming platform CBS News 24/7, chief White House correspondent Nancy Cordes feared what will happen at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Federal Election Commission (FEC), as in the latter case, she speculated this could mean any Democratic complaints to the FEC about elections could be ignored as long as Trump is in office (click “expand”): CBS News 24/7 worries the Slaughter decision from SCOTUS will now mean election complaints to the FEC will only be heard, depending on who's in the White House pic.twitter.com/OQUaQiHedv — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) June 29, 2026 [I]f you think about it, the Federal Trade Commission, which has five commissioners, three Republicans, two Democrats, is like so many other agencies that have been designed this way to be bipartisan. And this shakes all of that up. So, consider, for example, the Federal Communications Commission, which is very powerful, which makes decisions about broadband, makes decisions about broadcast licenses and internet licenses, and now suddenly, if there is no Democratic representation on that board — you know, we don’t know exactly what the Trump administration is going to do, that really changes the way debates take place and decision gets made. So, we’ll see how far the President wants to go with this. (....) Think about the Federal Election Commission, which takes complaints from across the political spectrum. Imagine if now, instead of a couple of Democratic commissioners and a majority of Republican commissioners, when Republican is in the Oval Office, if it's all Republican commissioners, does that mean that only complaints by Democrats about — about complaints by Republicans, about Democratic candidates, that those are the only complaints that really get attention, and then it flips four years later if a — if a Democrat is in power. So, I think that there are a lot of unknowns here. And it's not just the FTC, the FEC, the FCC, it's the National Labor Relations Board. This really could be a very far-reaching decision. In contrast to all this hyperbole, here was how longtime CBS News chief legal correspondent Jan Crawford broke down the Cook and Slaughter cases. Can we have a news media that’s more like this that is straight to the point and no meandering punditry? Can we have a news media that's more like CBS's Jan Crawford explaining Monday's Supreme Court opinions?! Straight to the point, no meandering punditry. Just the facts. pic.twitter.com/tjdfo5d6HE — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) June 29, 2026 To see the relevant transcripts from June 29, click here (for the ABC News Special), here (for ABC News Live), and here (for CBS News 24/7). June 29th, 2026 4:51 PM Curtis Houck 295772 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tim-graham/2026/06/29/new-york-times-cries-fake-some-world-cup-tourists-loving-american Some European visitors are gushing about America being awesome? The New York Times had to break out the hose to spray cold water on that. Times “food and culture” reporter Pete Wells played Fact Checker in a June 18 article headlined: Those World Cup Tourists Loving American Food? They’re Not All What They Seem. Visiting soccer fans enraptured by free refills and salsa have become the feel-good story of the summer, even when the facts don’t fit.   Wells began: Last week, the governor of New Jersey and the state’s official account both retweeted an X post with a video of “World Cup tourists” at a deli in Bergen County, discovering the glories of a chicken parm hero. The clip has been watched millions of times since then, one of many examples of foreign soccer fans greeting their first tastes of American cuisine with childlike wonder. There’s one problem with the story. The traveler in the video, an Englishman named Daniel Tooke, ate the hero in April. By June 11, when the World Cup began, Mr. Tooke had been back home in Norwich for weeks. At least Mr. Tooke is a real person. The same can’t be said for some other supposed World Cup tourists whose reactions to the eating and drinking rituals of the United States have beguiled the country. Beware! Some pro-America content is being made by TikTok comedians and fake Samurai warriors:  The Italian man whose awe-struck reaction to free Coke refills (“I can refill this 1,000 times!”) has become one of the most popular examples of the trope is a persona played by a TikTok comedian named Fabio Farati. His video, first posted last year, is one of hundreds along the same lines that he’s produced since 2018, dramatizing his encounters with ranch dressing on pizza and fried chicken on pasta. Nobunaga, the Japanese wanderer whose reverential written meditations on X about bottomless baskets of chips and salsa at a Mexican restaurant in the United States, isn’t quite what some observers have taken him for, either. He is a pseudonymous character. He isn’t on his way to any World Cup games, either. Wells briefly stipulated: “Of course, many of the overseas soccer fans loose in the States this month are genuine.” But he wanted to highlight the “ersatz.” Because uberpatriotic Americans are all suckers for a pro-America spin: As charmed as they are by the United States, the United States is even more charmed by them. For the past week or two, the country has been gazing with delight at its own reflection in the cracked mirror of social media. World Cup tourists going gaga over gas-station cuisine and Big Gulps has become the feel-good story of the deep-fried American summer…. Many Americans seem willing to take their reassurance in any form they can get, even if it comes from fake German tourists, imaginary samurai and Englishmen whose timelines don’t quite sync up with the World Cup schedule. If it became a viral trend for European tourists to trash America as a horrible place (with horrible cuisine), let's guess the Times wouldn't "fact check" that.  June 29th, 2026 4:48 PM Tim Graham 295771 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/business/joseph-vazquez/2026/06/29/watch-scott-jennings-shreds-cnn-nixing-screen-gas-price Imagine having the chutzpah to call out your own employer on national television for doing some underhanded crapola in order to weasel its way out of utter embarrassment. That’s what Scott Jennings did to CNN for trying to dial back its months-long gas price scareporn. Jennings took CNN to task for removing its obnoxious gas price tracker from "on-screen" prominence and website homepage during the June 25 edition of The Source with Kaitlan Collins. As host Collins sat there with her typical smirk, Jennings put the network on blast: “Look, gas prices are not up. They’re down! Oil is trading at $71 a barrel. We don’t run the gas price tracker on-screen anymore for a reason, you know? I mean, because it’s a non-story.” WABC Radio reported as April 8 — the last day the website page for the tracker was updated — that the network had scrubbed the ticker from the home screen as its agitprop over “$5 a gallon of gas” failed to materialize.  CNN senior reporter Matt Egan, who ran point on the digital doom-mongering, boosted the “Memorial Day sticker shock” May 20 and regurgitated the following: “Patrick De Haan, GasBuddy’s head of petroleum analysis, told CNN he expects the national average for regular gas will hit $5 a gallon at some point next month if the Strait of Hormuz remains closed.” Just a month and a week later, and that prediction aged like a carton of milk left out on the kitchen counter in a house with no air-conditioning. And passage through Strait of Hormuz is still under dispute. .@ScottJenningsKY calling out his own employer @CNN for its underhanded shenanigans in dialing down the gas price scareporn hoping no one would notice is must-see TV. Of course Kaitlin Collins deflects from the point and argues a strawman. pic.twitter.com/vRJ6Q2WWxi — Joe Vazquez (@JV3MRC) June 29, 2026 AAA reported June 29 that the current national average for a gallon of “regular unleaded” is $3.86, which is a sharp decline from the same date a month ago at $4.39, despite the ongoing U.S.-Iran conflict . Here’s another factoid: None of the spikes eclipsed the highest recorded average gas price that was logged during President Joe Biden’s term at $5.02 a gallon, and that was without an international war to boot. Collins, of course, tried to deflect away from Jennings’ point and argued a “muh, but Trump” strawman over the president’s parroting of a Biden-era talking point accusing “Big Oil” of price gouging. “I mean, the president doesn't think they're a nonstory because he was sounding like president Biden yesterday saying that these companies are gouging people,” she snorted. That literally had nothing to do with Jennings’ point, precisely because prices are in fact falling against CNN’s Chicken Little-ing to the contrary — all underscored by the network putting the whammy on prominently displaying its gas tracker like a daily gotcha against the president. Whether the president thought prices were dropping fast enough was irrelevant. The real story was CNN quietly dialing back the very narrative it had aggressively pushed for months. But don’t expect Collins to admit it.  June 29th, 2026 3:45 PM Joseph Vazquez 295769 https://newsbusters.org/blogs/cnsnews/craig-bannister/2026/06/29/supreme-court-decision-sparks-urgent-calls-pass-save Calls to pass the voter-integrity SAVE America Act intensified Monday following a Supreme Court ruling siding with a Mississippi law allowing mail-in ballots received up to five days after Election Day to be counted. In a TruthSocial.com post reacting to the decision in Watson/Mississippi v. RNC, President Donald Trump stressed the increased importance of passing the SAVE America Act and its three top elements: “In light of the tremendous loss in the Supreme Court today concerning Voter’s Rights, and the fact that ‘people’s’ votes are allowed to be counted LONG AFTER an Election is over, it is more important than ever to pass THE SAVE AMERICA ACT, which is ALL VOTERS MUST SHOW PHOTO I.D. (IDENTIFICATION!). ALL VOTERS MUST SHOW PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP. NO MAIL-IN BALLOTS (EXCEPT FOR ILLNESS, DISABILITY, MILITARY DEPLOYMENT, OR TRAVEL!).” “The SAVE America Act isn’t just supported by ‘MAGA hardliners.’ Americans overwhelmingly want this And deserve it!” Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) posted on X.com following the decision. A post by Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-MO) declared Monday’s ruling to be “a shockingly wrong decision” and further proof of the need to pass the SAVE America Act: “A shockingly wrong opinion. Justice Barrett joins with the liberal justices to hold that federal election law does not preempt states who allow late mail-in ballots to be counted. This is terrible for election integrity. Another reason we must pass the full SAVE American Act.” “Today’s ruling is even MORE reason why Congress needs to take action to secure our elections,” Senator Rick Scott (R-FL) posted, calling on his fellow Republicans to find a way to overcome Democrat senators’ filibuster preventing a vote on the House-passed bill: “We need to stop telling the American people that we can’t pass the SAVE America Act and we need to figure out how to get it done. We’re talking about the foundation of our entire government. Failure is not an option here.” The key voter-integrity component of the Act – requiring photo I.D. – enjoys broad public support spanning all demographics and party affiliations. Fully 83% of U.S. adults approve of requiring voters to provide a photo I.D. in order to cast their ballots, a Pew Research study found. Surveys by other organizations, such as Gallup and Heritage Action have yielded similar results. In a 5-4 decision, the high court reversed and remanded a Fifth Circuit ruling striking down the Mississippi law, which counts mail-in ballots received up to five days after Election Day – as long as they’re postmarked by Election Day. The high court’s decision rules that states can set their election rules in cases like this because federal statutes set a deadline for voting – but not for the receipt of votes cast by Election Day. “Not only is today’s decision inconsistent with statutory text, legal context, historical practice, and precedent; it also threatens to produce lamentable consequences,” Justice Samuel Alito warns in his dissenting opinion: “The majority’s holding spawns a slurry of troubling election-law questions and risks further undermining Americans’ confidence in election integrity.” “Diverse sources have recognized that mail-in ballots increase the potential for fraud,” Alito notes: “In 2005, a committee chaired by former President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James Baker found that absentee voting was ‘the largest source of potential voter fraud’ in American elections.” ….  “It is undeniable that a prohibition on counting late-arriving ballots would provide an additional hurdle for bad actors seeking to stuff ballot boxes when early election results suggest a tight race. The majority incorrectly removes this safeguard from federal law.” “When someone votes by mail, it is harder for officials to verify the identity of the person requesting and completing the ballot,” Justice Alito explains: “Mail voting also presents a greater opportunity for voter manipulation, a more vulnerable chain of ballot custody, and a diminished ability to detect improprieties in real time.” June 29th, 2026 3:20 PM Craig Bannister 295770