All Section

What Are You Looking For?

Popular Tags

Sun, Feb 22, 2026

K - Q

Supreme Court Tariff Ruling Will Put US ‘$2 Trillion Deeper in the Hole’

Newsbusters
Supreme Court Tariff Ruling Will Put US ‘$2 Trillion Deeper in the Hole’

Supreme Court Tariff Ruling Will Put US ‘$2 Trillion Deeper in the Hole’

Craig Bannister
February 20th, 2026 2:47 PM

Friday’s Supreme Court decision ending President Donald Trump’s reciprocal tariffs will exacerbate the nation’s financial crisis, analysis of the decision shows.

“With today’s Supreme Court ruling affirming the illegality of President Trump’s emergency tariffs, the country will now be about $2 trillion deeper in the hole,” Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) President Maya MacGuineas said, announcing the organization’s findings.

“With the national debt already the size of the entire U.S. economy and interest on the debt costing more than $1 trillion this year, this is very bad news,” MacGuineas said, calling on Congress to take action to offset the lost revenue.

“Whatever one feels about the tariffs themselves, the country needs that $2 trillion in fiscal improvements, all of which should be dedicated to deficit reduction,” MacGuineas said.

One option CRFB proposes is to enact a border-adjusted cash flow tax, a Destination-Based Cash Flow Tax (DBCFT) business consumption tax:

“This tax would somewhat resemble tariffs because it includes a ‘border adjustment’ that effectively taxes imports (while making exports deductible).

“A DBCFT of 8 or 9 percent would be enough to replace the lost tariff revenue. At about 25 percent, it could replace the lost tariffs and corporate income tax. Removing the deduction for wages would essentially turn the DBCFT into a value-added tax (VAT), which could generate the needed revenue with a 3 to 5 percent rate.”

If the border-related tax option isn’t employed, some other action must be taken, CRFB warns:

“Failing to offset the loss of revenue at all would leave the debt on an even more unsustainable path, rising to 126 percent of GDP by 2035 as opposed to 120 percent under the CRFB Adjusted August 2025 Baseline. Either scenario would result in debt being substantially above current levels and the prior record that resulted from World War II (106 percent of GDP).

“The higher the debt rises, the more policymakers put our economy and budget at risk.”

The U.S. debt currently exceeds $38 trillion, or more than $113,000 for every person in the country.

The national trade deficit was $70.3 billion last December, the Bureau of Economic Analysis reported Thursday.

MS NOW: Ironic For MAGA To Celebrate Alysa Liu's Gold Medal

Newsbusters
MS NOW: Ironic For MAGA To Celebrate Alysa Liu's Gold Medal

MS NOW: Ironic For MAGA To Celebrate Alysa Liu's Gold Medal

Alex Christy
February 20th, 2026 1:33 PM

MS Now’s fun haters at Morning Joe had an interesting recap on Friday of the previous day’s Olympic events, where the U.S. women’s hockey team defeated Canada in a dramatic overtime comeback to win the gold medal, and American figure skater Alysa Liu also took home gold. Forcing politics into sports, ESPN talking head Pablo Torre, the hockey women proved one can cheer on America without embracing a certain nameless president, while host Joe Scarborough and New York Times opinion writer Eugene Robinson argued it was ironic for “MAGA World” to celebrate an immigrant.

Torre declared that “the thing I marvel at not only is the way that, oh, wait a minute, maybe there's the possibility of a global village in some capacity. Still, when I watch these games, maybe there's the capacity for us to celebrate American dominance in a way that feels genuine as opposed to, you know, a series of lies to prop up a certain administration.”

 

 

Team USA has always been a key part of American monoculture, which is why some athletes’ desire to opine on politics has been so disappointing. If liberals such as Torre let their feelings about Trump overpower their feelings for the country, that says more about them than it does Trump.

However, the hot takes were just beginning. Scarborough told Robinson that “It was really inspiring. I will say how hilarious that the sort of MAGA, online MAGA World were celebrating Alyssa Liu's gold medal without a hint of any irony. Celebrating the immigrant. Who they were celebrating as an American, you know, USA, USA. Which, of course, that's basically proving the point that we've been making all along, that Ronald Reagan made in his final speech to America, that we are strengthened by immigrants.”

The context for this is that Liu’s father fled China for his role in supporting the Tiananmen Square protests and has been stalked by Chinese spies ever since. It also comes as American-born skier Eileen Gu chose to dump her country and compete for her mother’s China, America’s biggest rival in the world today. Gu, who has no problem speaking out against Trump, is not prepared to discuss China’s genocidal repression of the Uyghurs.

Of course, Scarborough left all that out. As for Robinson, he agreed with Scarborough and while cracking himself and Scarborough up, declared, “Oops. Yes, they, you know, they're celebrating this. You know, ‘We're supposed to hate this, but we can't hate it because USA, USA.’ So, you know, it's—it was crazy. Those were two amazing moments yesterday, though.”

Beyond being a gold medalist, conservatives' embrace of Liu as a role model has to do with the contrast she provides with Gu. One is a story of patriotism and assimilation, while the other is a story of betrayal for money. Liu and Gu are a great snapshot of the immigration dilemma: some immigrants move to America and instill their children with the virtues of America and some don’t. The problem is Morning Joe only wants to talk about one side of the equation.

Here is a transcript for the February 20 show:

MS NOW Morning Joe

2/20/2026

9:02 AM ET

PABLO TORRE: But finally we get to the Olympics—

JOE SCARBOROUGH: Yeah. Yeah.

TORRE: —and in the Olympics, look, the thing I marvel at not only is the way that, oh, wait a minute, maybe there's the possibility of a global village in some capacity. Still, when I watch these games, maybe there's the capacity for us to celebrate American dominance in a way that feels genuine as opposed to, you know, a series of lies to prop up a certain administration.

But also what it's like when you don't choke under pressure. It's amazing. These are not athletes who are going to make millions of dollars in their lives. This is it. And when you see Americans do this—

SCARBOROUGH: Yeah.

TORRE: — it is. It's the best of us in a sincere way for a couple of weeks.

JOE SCARBOROUGH: It really is. And Gene Robinson, it was really inspiring. I will say how hilarious that the sort of MAGA, online MAGA World were celebrating Alysa Liu's gold medal without a hint of any irony. Celebrating the immigrant.

TORRE: That's right.

SCARBOROUGH: Who they were celebrating as an American, you know, USA, USA. Which, of course, that's basically proving the point that we've been making all along, that Ronald Reagan made in his final speech to America, that we are strengthened by immigrants.

EUGENE ROBINSON: Oops. Yes, they, you know, they're celebrating this. You know, “we're supposed to hate this, but we can't hate it because USA, USA.” So, you know, it's—it was crazy. Those were two amazing moments yesterday, though.

ABC Trumpets ‘Devastating’ Blow to Trump Presidency in SCOTUS Case on Tariffs

Newsbusters
ABC Trumpets ‘Devastating’ Blow to Trump Presidency in SCOTUS Case on Tariffs

ABC Trumpets ‘Devastating’ Blow to Trump Presidency in SCOTUS Case on Tariffs

Curtis Houck
February 20th, 2026 1:26 PM

All the major broadcast networks — ABC, CBS, and NBC — broke in Friday morning with special reports on the Supreme Court’s 6-to-3 ruling declaring most of President Trump’s landmark tariffs unconstitutional. Unsurprisingly, ABC was almost ebullient in touting the ruling as “devastating,” “huge,” and “monumental” in hampering Trump’s presidency.

Correspondent Devin Dwyer — who took over as the lone Court reporter at ABC after Terry Moran’s axing — said this was “one of the most significant decisions on presidential power in decades”

Dispatch and SCOTUS editor and ABC legal analyst Sarah Isgur was even more explicit:

.@SCOTUSblog editor/@ABC legal analyst @WhigNewtons on the SCOTUS ruling against most of Trump’s tariffs...

“This has been a Supreme Court that has really been shrinking down executive power. We saw them do this during the Biden administration with his student loan debt… pic.twitter.com/4Ukxhcp77n

— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) February 20, 2026 ">

Of course, chief White House correspondent and Biden regime apple polisher Mary Bruce was almost giddy in touting the ruling as a “devastating,” “huge blow to this White House and to this President” with this entire presidency “now coming into question” with the tariff revenue possibly having to be refunded.

“There is a lot of questions about what happens to the money that has been collected so far...What happens to other issues, like, for instance, pharmaceutical prices....[I]t is the ripple effects of this will be tremendous. What does it mean for the manufacturing here in the U.S....I can tell you this: Based off of the President’s comments in the lead up to this, while we haven’t gotten a reaction from him just yet, he certainly is likely to be deeply frustrated and angry about this decision,” she added.

ABC’s @JonKarl on the SCOTUS decision about tariffs...

“This is both a monumental decision and frankly, an obvious one. I mean, it seemed clear from the day that Donald Trump came out and announced his so-called reciprocal tariffs on the rest of the world, or most of the world,… pic.twitter.com/SawFe4jzHo

— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) February 20, 2026 ">

CBS spent nearly 13 minutes on-air, starting with longtime legal correspondent Jan Crawford framing it as “the most significant U.S. Supreme [Court] loss for a U.S. President, I think, in modern history” but should be seen as “a deeply divided issue” even within the 6-3 breakdown

 

“But the bottom line Tony, a major defeat for the President. I think you can put that right up there with some of the most significant Supreme Court losses by a U.S. president in history,” she emphasized.

WATCH: @JanCBS Crawford argues this tariff ruling shows people should quit saying this Supreme Court is wholly beholden to Trump...

“And what this says is that all of these people who have been saying that this is a Supreme Court that’s in the tank for Donald Trump, need to take… pic.twitter.com/qYkJhuEiMG

— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) February 20, 2026 ">

Following more explanation of the Court’s reasoning from legal analyst Jessica Levinson, senior White House correspondent Ed O’Keefe floated possible alternative approaches the White House could take because the ruling will impact “not only the economic agenda, but arguably the foreign policy agenda...because the hope here at the White House, at times, was to be able to use the threat of tariffs as sort of a coercive tool to get their way with certain countries[.]”

Chief Washington correspondent Major Garrett and chief business and tech correspondent Jo Ling Kent offered historical and economic reactions, respectively (click “expand”):

GARRETT: Well, the Supreme Court is well aware of the Constitutional history of generating revenue, a power explicitly reserved to Congress in its origination in the Constitution. And before, we had an income tax in this country, we raised revenue principally through tariffs. And there were lots of conflicts that previous Supreme Courts dealt with about the legality of those tariffs. That precedent is a backdrop for this. President Trump has jawboned and criticized this Court, saying if you rule against me you’re going to destroy our economy, waging a very aggressive public relations campaign. But the Court cares what the Constitution says and what precedent says. It’s interesting to note, Tony, this 1977 law that Jan and others have referred to grew out of a crisis with Iran after the Iranian revolution, and it has been used principally to freeze assets or to levy sanctions. The Trump administration told the Supreme Court it had almost unlimited powers to impose tariffs, not just as an economic matter but as a diplomatic cudgel. And what the Court said and I think this is important. Summarizing the administration’s argument before it, “that view would represent a transformational expansion of the President’s authority over tariff policy. It is also telling,” the court wrote, “that in the IEEPA’s half century — that’s the law of existence — no president has invoked the statute to impose any tariffs, let alone tariffs, of the magnitude of this magnitude and scope.” So essentially, what the Court is saying is we have a Congress. Congress is negotiate laws with presidents, as this law was negotiated. If you follow that law, you can do it. If you expand way beyond that law, you can’t. And to Ed’s previous point, there’s another law in 1962 — law — the Trade Expansion Act, there’s a section 232 there. This President — previous presidents have used that to impose tariffs. There are many remedies this administration could look to and the trade representative, Jamieson Greer has said many times, if we lose in the Supreme Court, we have other remedies to advance our tariff agenda. This is not the end of the tariff conversation under this administration, but it is a setback significantly on this variant of using tariffs the way the President has attempted to enforce them.

(....)

KENT: [M]y phones are exploding right now with reaction from small business owners across the country we’ve been interviewing people about these tariffs for over the last year. And Emily Ley, a small business owner in Sarasota, Florida, tells me she’s thrilled. She’s relieved. It gives us clarity. She runs a very successful stationery and planner business. Another business owner, Beth, in Zumbrota, Minnesota, Southern Minnesota, she runs Busy Baby Mat and she says she’s seeing major relief that this is bittersweet. She just signed another $13,000 check to — you know for these tariffs to China last week. And now she feels like maybe she can start seeking a refund. Now when you pull back, how much does the average American household paid for these tariffs, you can see it’s about $1,700, according to the Yale Budget Lab. So what happens next? If this continues to move a pace, we expect overall prices, which could be good news for consumers to drop. But that won’t happen quickly. We also expect to see perishable items your fruits and veggies, they actually might go down in price a little bit more quickly. You might see durable goods like your tech products and furniture see a slight decrease as well. And you can see overall the price increases that you may be facing at home due to tariffs across the board there especially in apparel, things that are imported from overseas. But if you’re looking for a Trump tariff refund, if you will, as an individual family member, for example, that’s probably off the table. But we do expect businesses to start seeking tariffs and perhaps forming class action lawsuits to get this money back. As a result of this ruling those companies could get refunds from the Treasury. But overall, the small business reaction has been overwhelmingly positive, saying they feel that they’re thrilled and they’re relieved.

NBC was on the air for just over nine minutes and was relatively muted but matter-of-the-fact in relaying the ruling.

Chief legal correspondent and Saturday Today co-host Laura Jarrett emphasized the right-of-center justices who voted against the constitutionality of Trump’s tariffs, combining for half the majority that delivered “a major blow to the centerpiece of the President’s economic agenda” and could have ripple effects with forthcoming class-action lawsuits by affected companies.

Senior White House correspondent Garrett Haake said he could not “overstate how important these tariffs were as a tool for President Trump” in “address[ing] trade deficits, to try to bring money into the U.S. government...sending back out to the American people in the form of refund checks or to use to fund other programs...and he has claimed repeatedly that the tariffs have helped him solve global conflicts around the world[.]”

Jarrett herself wrapped by quoting from Justice Gorsuch’s concurring opinion and stating executive authority is the theme of this Supreme Court term (click “expand”):

Yeah, it’s interesting just to see Justice Gorsuch complaining in his concurrence here knowing the criticism that could be on the way at least from a political standpoint and he says, “all I can offer them that most major decisions affecting the rights and responsibilities of the American people are funneled through the legislative process for a reason. Yes, legislating can be hard and take time and, yes, it can be tempting to bypass Congress when some passing problem arises, but the deliberative nature of the legislative process was the whole point of its design, essentially saying the Constitution was set up this way, having the legislative branch be the one that can levy taxes. And the President, of course, can enforce the laws. He can regulate some imports, but he can’t go too far, and the Constitution does that by design.

(....)

Well, and this whole term, if you think about it, is the Supreme Court taking a hard look at some of the things Donald Trump has done that have never been done before, like trying to fire a member of the Federal Reserve board, Lisa Cook. It’s another big case on the docket. He’s tried to fire her. He’s tried to fire a woman who was on the FTC. They obviously have other big questions concerning his birthright citizenship plan. So, this is really the term of SCOTUS and the President, and how they see executive authority. At least as it results to tariffs, [this] is a big blow.

To see the relevant transcripts from the network special reports on February 20, click here (for ABC), here (for CBS), and here (for NBC).

MS NOW's Jacob Soboroff Repeats Lies to Accuse DHS Spokesperson of Lies

Newsbusters
MS NOW's Jacob Soboroff Repeats Lies to Accuse DHS Spokesperson of Lies

MS NOW's Jacob Soboroff Repeats Lies to Accuse DHS Spokesperson of Lies

Brad Wilmouth
February 20th, 2026 1:21 PM

In the aftermath of DHS assistant secretary Tricia McLaughlin announcing her resignation, MS NOW reporter Jacob Soboroff accused her of spreading misinformation when, in fact, he was the one misinforming his viewers.

Antonia Hylton filled in for Chris Hayes on Monday's All In show. She began by asking Soboroff what it has been like having to interact with McLaughlin to get information about immigration issues. He began by taking a shot at ex-DHS secretary Kirstjen Nielsen from the first Donald Trump administration: "It's been a bit of deja vu quite frankly, and I think that Tricia McLaughlin comes from a long line, I think it's fair to say, of Trump administration officials dealing with immigration policy that have been less than forthright with the truth."

Referring to the other anti-Trump guest, former Trump DHS official Miles Taylor, Soboroff continued:

And Miles Taylor knows this well and has spoken out since his time in the administration about this to Kirstjen Nielsen, who Miles worked for during the first family separation policy during the first Trump administration -- very famously said, "We do not have a policy of separating families at the border, period." That was on June 17, 2018. And the American people are not stupid -- they saw right through it.

It has been previously documented by NewsBusters that in June 2018 Nielsen forthrightly announced that those who crossed the border illegally would be detained and separated from their children, but Soboroff prefers to harp on one of her answers to a question to portray her as dishonest.

The MS NOW reporter then repeated more previously debunked information when he claimed that illegal alien Narciso Barranco did not swing his weed whacker at Border Patrol agents in Los Angeles even though there is video of him doing just that. Here's Soboroff:

And Tricia McLaughlin has basically taken a similar posture with the American people. The stories that I have reported on, whether it was Narciso Barranco, the landscaper who was violently detained outside of that IHOP in Santa Ana, California. She accused him of attacking agents with a weed whacker, despite the fact that the video showed him retreating.

Hylton then went to Taylor, who fretted about who would replace McLaughlin, and then claimed that DHS is violating constitutional rights.

When getting his chance to follow up, Soboroff complained that immigration enforcement has been too harsh all the way back to the Clinton administration, and talked up liberal protesters pushing congressional Democrats to go further in enacting laws to protect illegal aliens.

Earlier in the day, on Ana Cabrera Reports, reporter Vaughn Hillyard accused McLaughlin of exaggerating how many ICE detainees had criminal records even though his own network has been recently highlighting a CBS News study reporting that more than 60 percent of detainees had either been convicted or charged with non-immigration crimes, which is close to what McLaughlin has repeatedly cited in her television appearances.

Here's Hilliard: "She is somebody who has suggested that DHS data had shown that the great majority of the individuals who had been deported and detained under the Trump administration were convicted criminals. Much of that data that was put out there came into deep questions as you began to unwrap some of the numbers."

Transcripts follow:

MS NOW's All In with Chris Hayes

February 17, 2026

8:08 p.m. Eastern

ANTONIA HYLTON, FILL-IN HOST: I guess, take us down memory lane. You and I -- we both have worked with and spoken to Tricia McLaughlin a decent amount over the past. So what has it been like for you trying to report out your stories and get to the truth in your interactions with her?

JACOB SOBOROFF: You know what, Antonia? It's been a bit of deja vu quite frankly, and I think that Tricia McLaughlin comes from a long line, I think it's fair to say, of Trump administration officials dealing with immigration policy that have been less than forthright with the truth.

And Miles Taylor knows this well and has spoken out since his time in the administration about this to Kirsten Nielsen, who Miles worked for during the first family separation policy during the first Trump administration -- very famously said, "We do not have a policy of separating families at the border, period." That was on June 17, 2018. And the American people are not stupid -- they saw right through it. They stood in the streets and they protested.

And Tricia McLaughlin has basically taken a similar posture with the American people. The stories that I have reported on, whether it was Narciso Barranco, the landscaper who was violently detained outside of that IHOP in Santa Ana, California. She accused him of attacking agents with a weed whacker, despite the fact that the video showed him retreating. He was never charged with a crime for doing that.

Any Lucia Lopez, the 19-year-old coming home from Babson College who was deported to Honduras while she was going to see her parents in San Antonio -- she defended that deportation despite the fact that the administration later admitted they did it in error. Even Nory Sontay Ramos, who I reported on that high school star student track star who was taken at a routine immigration check, and she defended those types of immigration hearings as well.

The American people know exactly what this administration is doing. Doesn't matter how many times Tricia McLaughlin tried to defend it. The list goes on and on and on. I can think of many more examples. We don't have enough time to go through all of them -- the ones in which she didn't tell the American people the truth about what we could plainly see with our own eyeballs.

(...)

HYLTON: Do you think her departure signals a real change strategically in terms of the way policy is going to roll out? Or do you think we're going to get someone else who just brings more of the same?

MILES TAYLOR, EX-DHS OFFICIAL: I shudder to think who comes next. And -- and you and Jacob both know this incredibly well, but I have to align with what Jacob said at the top of the program. The administration, whether it was the first Trump administration or this one, has tried to portray that cruelty is a consequence, an inadvertent consequence of policies that Renee Good, that Alex Pretti, that family separation, that all of these things are unfortunate mistakes. That is not true.

That's where the lie machine starts at DHS. It's where it started when I was there. The cruelty, as has been said often, is the point here. It is the point. And -- sometimes they let the mask slip and they say that. In private they do. And in public, you've been seeing that happen more and more where they admit the point is to deter the political opposition. You say, "Wait a second, I thought this was about immigration." "Oh, well, we also want to send ICE to the polls."

And I think that McLaughlin has only continued that tradition. She's probably become more of a little Trump than the other little Trumps in the administration. But what she hasn't been able to cover up in her tenure is that there has been an extraordinary violation of constitutional rights by this department, and that's because we've had people brave enough to take one of these and to go outside and to film it.

And I do want to say something about this shutdown, because Republicans are going to say Democrats are holding the government hostage. I want to clarify something, and I'm not a Democrat. I'm saying this as someone who's watched this -- who's been in that department in two presidential administrations. Democrats aren't demanding policy changes.

They are demanding compliance with the United States Constitution. There have been violations by this department of the 1st Amendment rights of Americans and the 4th Amendment rights of Americans and the 2nd Amendment rights of Americans and the 10th Amendment and the 14th Amendment. And those are just the ones that come to my mind right now. This isn't about Democrats and Republicans. This is about whether the Constitution is still a viable document in this country or not. And DHS is at ground zero of that debate.

HYLTON: Well, Jacob, to Miles' point there, do you think that this laundry list, the list of demands that Democrats are sending to Republicans right now, when you talk to voters, to protesters that I know you speak with every week, do you think they see those demands as actually being enough because so many of them are just sort of basically what other law enforcement agencies already have to do and comply with day in and day out. Do they think that this list is enough, given just the outrage, the horror that there is just so deeply felt across this country right now?

SOBOROFF: Not people who have spent enough time thinking about the system to understand that where we are today is a product of decades of bipartisan, deterrence-based, punitive-based immigration policy that started in the modern era in the Clinton administration, and under every President of the United States -- Democratic or Republican -- cruelty was used as a tool of immigration enforcement.

No amount of unmasking ICE agents, no amount of identifying themselves, is going to change the fact that we have a for profit detention system largely in the United States of America that criminalizes people who come here seeking a better life, treats them as points on a bar graph or a chart, or talks about them like they're the weather, the flow, the surge, the inundation, the invasion, in the words of this administration.

Joe Biden promised a wholesale departure from the cruelty of the first Trump administration -- fair, safe, humane, orderly immigration policy. And we ended up back here. I think the American people are very skeptical, and that is why you are seeing people in the streets in the numbers that we have seen in Minnesota, in Charlotte, in Chicago, here in Los Angeles, outside the hallways of 26 Federal Plaza in New York, because it's not enough, frankly, to rely on our lawmakers going to Capitol Hill and saying they're going to change things. We've been hearing that for decades as it comes to immigration.

And I think that the American people now have not only are they not stupid, and what Tricia Mclaughlin has been telling them they know is not true, but they know it's going to take a lot more than relying on elected officials to go up to Capitol Hill and change the immigration system and the cruelty that we've been seeing in the streets.

(...)

Fox's America's Newsroom

September 9, 2025

10:10 a.m. Eastern

TRICIA McLAUGHLIN, DHS ASSISTANT SECRETARY: Seventy percent of those illegal aliens who have been arrested under this administration have prior convictions or pending charges. And that doesn't even include those who have been arrested who don't have rap sheets in the U.S. but have rap sheets in their countries of origin. They might be a gang member -- they might have a human rights violation against them.

(...)

Fox's America Reports

November 11, 2025

1:19 p.m.

McLAUGHLIN: In Chicago, we've seen fantastic results -- the arrests of about 5,000 illegal aliens, 70 percent of which are -- have past criminal convictions or pending criminal charges against them.

(...)

Fox's America's Newsroom

January 19, 2026

9:08 a.m.

McLAUGHLIN: The facts on the ground, Dana, is that 70 percent of those that have been arrested under the Trump administration -- seven, zero -- either have prior criminal convictions or pending criminal charges against them. That does not even include known or suspected terrorists of which we've arrested over 1,000. That doesn't include gang membership -- that doesn't even include being wanted for a violent crime in your country of origin or a third country.

(...)

MSNOW's Katy Tur Reports

February 9, 2026

2:48 p.m. 

(discussing a study by CBS News that more than 60 percent of arrestees either had criminal convictions or criminal charges in addition to "civil immigration violations")

JACOB SOBOROFF: The larger picture is what we have seen anecdotally over and over and over again. They are not going after the worst of the worst, and you cannot institute the largest mass deportation program by going after only the worst or the worst.

KATY TUR: Is it because there are not that many of the quote, unquote "worst of the worst" to go after -- that if you wanted to do mass deportations, if you want to exceed the number of deportations that President Obama did, if you want a million people a year, that you're going to have to get people who are not violent criminals?

(...)

MSNOW's Ana Cabrera Reports

February 17, 2026

11:32 a.m.

VAUGHN HILLYARD: She is somebody who has suggested that DHS data had shown that the great majority of the individuals who had been deported and detained under the Trump administration were convicted criminals. Much of that data that was put out there came into deep questions as you began to unwrap some of the numbers.

New CNN Doc Tease Now Goes After Christian Schools as ‘Nationalist’

Newsbusters
New CNN Doc Tease Now Goes After Christian Schools as ‘Nationalist’

New CNN Doc Tease Now Goes After Christian Schools as ‘Nationalist’

Nicholas Spinnato
February 20th, 2026 12:54 PM

In another tease for CNN’s new documentary on The Rise of Christian Nationalism, Pamela Brown continued her promotion of hour-long “special report” by going after Christian schools’ methods of teaching and punishment amid a recent rise of shooting attacks against Christian schools on Thursday’s CNN News Central.

Brown started her report by calling classical Christian schools as “foundational” for the “Christian nationalism” movement. 

She visited and interviewed the heads of a classical Christian school in Taylor, Texas, who happened to be a married couple. She made sure to make a point that a religious school's teachings are… built upon the ideals of their religion, “Religion isn't just a subject, it's embedded in every subject and in the way they discipline students who may act out of turn.”

 

While America sees more transgenders shooting up Christian schools, Pamela Brown's new tease for her anti-Christian doc also bashes such schools:
"Religion isn't just a subject, it's embedded in every subject and in the way they discipline students who may act out of turn." pic.twitter.com/TvmnoTCnrF

— Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) February 19, 2026 ">

 

Brown's interview with the school leaders focused on the discipline techniques of the classroom, some of which have been common occurrence at religious schools for many years, “Within strict reformed churches, disobedience demands discipline. Whether from a parent, a husband, or a teacher.”

Headmaster Caleb Ripple then added, “The goal of biblical discipline is to get them back into fellowship with God, with one another. And nine times out of ten our teachers are able to get that done in the classroom.”

As for the one exception, Headmistress EJ Ripple declared, “We do have a spanking policy. We'll make a phone call to the parents and say we have to resolve the issue. So whether it's you coming to pick them up or you coming and administering your own discipline, or us administering a spanking. The root of the problem is a sinful heart.”

Caleb concluded, “We do not ever leave that room after a spanking. And the student is sulky, angry, mad. It is always a restoration of fellowship and it's a beautiful picture. It really is.”

The short preview ended as Brown pointed out the presence of high chairs in the classroom, as her teachers who are mothers are “encouraged to bring their newborns to school. There could be babies crawling around while they teach. They might be holding their babies, Brianna. It's to remind the students that their female teachers' primary role, first and foremost, is to be a mother.”

The documentary tease’s use of the paddle is meant to invoke an image of violence at these schools, but in reality it is part of stories that have been told about corporal punishment at some Christian schools for decades.

The depiction of these schools also comes at a time where Christian schools have been victims of shooting attacks, with some being motivated by transgender ideologies seen in Minneapolis and Nashville. 

It is also important to note in most of the documentary teases so far, there has been little explicit connection of Christianity to politics, except for a connection between as Christian pastor, Doug Wilson, and Secretary Pete Hegseth.

It may lead some to ask if some of CNN's resources could be used to cover topics other than Christianity.

The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read:

CNN News Central

February 19, 2026

1:57:50 PM

BRIANNA KEILAR: CNN's brand new episode of The Whole Story with Anderson Cooper examines the rise of Christian nationalism in the United States. That ideology is rooted in the belief that the U.S. was founded as a Christian nation and its laws and institutions should reflect that. CNN anchor and chief investigative correspondent Pamela Brown has been digging into this. All right, Pamela, tell us what you found.

PAMELA BROWN: Well Brianna, when I embarked on this documentary on Christian nationalism, I wanted to better understand the curriculums and ultimate goals of classical Christian schools, which are really foundational for this movement and what the environment there looks like. 

So, I embedded with a community in southeast Texas called Taylor, where I interviewed several folks affiliated with the classical Christian school in the town there, that included the headmaster and headmistress who are married, and another teacher who plans to send all of her children there. Religion isn't just a subject, it's embedded in every subject and in the way they discipline students who may act out of turn.

[Cuts to video]

BROWN: Within strict reformed churches, disobedience demands discipline. Whether from a parent, a husband, or a teacher.

CALEB RIPPLE (Classical Christian School Headmaster): The goal of biblical discipline is to get them back into fellowship with God, with one another. And nine times out of ten our teachers are able to get that done in the classroom.

BROWN: But when they can’t.

GROUP: We do have a paddle.

EJ RIPPLE (Classical Christian School Headmistress): We do have a spanking policy. We'll make a phone call to the parents and say we have to resolve the issue. So, whether it's you coming to pick them up or you coming and administering your own discipline, or us administering a spanking. The root of the problem is a sinful heart.

C. RIPPLE: We do not ever leave that room after a spanking. And the student is sulky, angry, mad. It is always a restoration of fellowship and it's a beautiful picture. It really is.

[Cuts back to live]

BROWN: Now, something they wanted to make clear to me is that disobeying the teacher, while under the authority of that teacher, in their view is also disobeying God. So they see the paddling as a picture of restoration for the students. 

And another element our viewers might find interesting, is at the back of the classroom where we did this interview, there were high chairs. The teachers explained that mothers who are teachers are encouraged to bring their newborns to school. There could be babies crawling around while they teach. They might be holding their babies, Brianna. It's to remind the students that their female teachers' primary role, first and foremost, is to be a mother. I mean, that is foundational as well in their belief system that women should be submissive to their husbands and they should be a mother first and foremost.

So, I'm going to examine all of this and much more in my hour long documentary on The Whole story with Anderson Cooper this Sunday, February 22nd at 8 PM Eastern on CNN, or the next day on CNN's all access streaming platform. And you can see other elements of the story while we're promoting this week on my Instagram, @PamelaBrownCNN.

KEILAR: Really fascinating. And I know it’s going to generate a lot of conversation.

BROWN: And it should. And I hope people of all different faiths watch this and learn something from it, because it is a consequential moment in our country.

What the Supreme Court’s Anti-Trump Tariff Decision Does and Doesn’t Do, Rep. Meuser Explains

Newsbusters
What the Supreme Court’s Anti-Trump Tariff Decision Does and Doesn’t Do, Rep. Meuser Explains

What the Supreme Court’s Anti-Trump Tariff Decision Does and Doesn’t Do, Rep. Meuser Explains

Craig Bannister
February 20th, 2026 12:33 PM

In a 6-3 Friday, the Supreme Court blocked President Donald Trump’s imposition of reciprocal tariffs, which the president had successfully used to raise much-needed government revenue and level the playing field with countries charging exorbitant tariffs on U.S. goods.

The decision upheld rulings by lower courts declaring Trump’s use of a presidential emergency power provision to unilaterally impose the tariffs unconstitutional.

The ruling invalidating Trump’s tariffs immediately sparked extravagant conjecture and commentary about the implications of the decision.

“It is important to be clear about what the Supreme Court’s decision on IEEPA does — and does not — do,” Rep. Dan Meuser (R-Pa.) wrote in a social media post setting the record straight about the ramifications of the decision.

The ruling does not invalidate all of Trump’s tariffs – just those imposed by his use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), Rep. Meuser explains:

“First, the Court did not strike down the President’s broader trade authority. The President retains extensive tariff authority under longstanding statutes, including:

  • Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act (national security)
  • Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 (unfair trade practices)
  • Section 201 safeguards
  • Section 338 of the Trade Act of 1930
  • Other congressionally delegated trade enforcement tools.”

“All tariffs imposed under those authorities remain fully in effect,” Meuser says.

Additionally, the ruling does not invalidate the fruits of Trump’s use of the tariffs to negotiate favorable trade terms, such as lower tariffs charged on U.S. exports by other countries, Meuser notes:

“Second, all trade agreements and commitments secured during this period remain in place. The Court’s ruling does not unwind negotiated deals, investment pledges, LNG purchase agreements, or manufacturing commitments.”

“What the Court did do is remove a key leverage tool under IEEPA,” Rep. Meuser writes. “That tool provided the flexibility to move quickly, impose broad reciprocal tariffs, and bring trading partners to the table.”

Nonetheless, the ruling will not derail Trump’s “America First” trade policy, the Republican says, promising that the president will continue to use every legal authority available to protect American workers, strengthen domestic manufacturing, and secure fair treatment for the United States in the global economy:

“While the Court has now limited one of those tools, the President retains powerful and proven authorities to ensure our trading partners honor their commitments.”

USDA Buys $75M of Butter, $263M of Dairy and Agricultural Products for Distribution to the Needy

Newsbusters
USDA Buys $75M of Butter, $263M of Dairy and Agricultural Products for Distribution to the Needy

USDA Buys $75M of Butter, $263M of Dairy and Agricultural Products for Distribution to the Needy

Craig Bannister
February 20th, 2026 11:12 AM

The Trump Administration is purchasing $263 million of domestically-produced food products, including $75 million of butter, to distribute to the nation’s food banks and nutrition assistance programs, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced Thursday.

“From milk and dairy to fruits, legumes, and tree nuts, these staples are essential for feeding families and sustaining America’s agricultural economy,” USDA Sec. Brooke Rollins said in a statement. “Through these Section 32 purchases, USDA is delivering wholesome, real food to Americans while injecting critical dollars into local economies.”

While the USDA will purchase a wide range of dairy and agricultural products, more than a quarter of the $263 million will be used to purchase butter – its largest butter buy in five years and more than double the amount it’ll spend on the number two category, cheese:

  • Butter: $75 million
  • Cheddar Cheese and Cheese Products: $32.5 million
  • Dried Beans (Black and Pinto): $25 million
  • Fresh Fluid Milk: $20.5 million
  • Fresh Pears: $15 million
  • Lentils: $14 million
  • Chickpeas: $12 million
  • Swiss Cheese: $10 million
  • Ultra-High Temperature Milk: $10 million
  • Pecans: $10 million
  • Split Peas: $24 million
  • Walnuts: $15 million

The USDA distributes butter to the needy because it’s essential for the preparation of commonly-donated items like macaroni and cheese, rice mixes, and baking kits.

In addition to feeding the needy, the USDA purchases will also inject critical dollars into local economies by stabilizing U.S. dairy and agriculture markets, Sec. Rollins explained:

“By turning harvests into meals, we are not only stabilizing farm income and protecting rural jobs—we are nourishing our nation and supporting the farmers who feed America.”

International Dairy Foods Association President Michael Dykes reacted to Thursday’s news by stressing the nutritional importance of the items on the USDA’s shopping list:

“IDFA applauds USDA’s significant investment in nutritious U.S. dairy products for Americans who rely on food assistance and federal nutrition programs.

“Milk, cheese, butter and other dairy foods deliver essential nutrients that support health at every stage of life.” We thank USDA for supporting America’s dairy farmers and processors while ensuring wholesome, nutrient-dense foods reach communities in need.”

“Under President Trump’s leadership, these investments strengthen the food supply, sustain rural communities, and reinforce agriculture as a cornerstone of economic resilience,” Sec. Rollins said.

“Dairy farmers have shared in the struggles faced throughout the agricultural economy, and these purchases will provide important relief to producers who will benefit from the additional demand, helping them provide nutritious dairy products to Americans and the world,” National Milk Producers Federation President & CEO Gregg Doud said.

The USDA purchases are being made through USDA’s authority under Section 32 of the Agriculture Act of 1935 and will be provided to USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) nutrition assistance programs, including food banks that operate The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP).

NewsBusters Podcast: Libs Coddling Colbert and Circling Around Whoopi

Newsbusters
NewsBusters Podcast: Libs Coddling Colbert and Circling Around Whoopi

NewsBusters Podcast: Libs Coddling Colbert and Circling Around Whoopi

Tim Graham
February 20th, 2026 10:15 AM

It was a good week for NewsBusters issues. In the new eruption of leftist protest over anyone demanding Stephen Colbert provide "Equal Time" to their incessant tilt, we point out again that all the comedy shows tilt dramatically to the left, just like The View. Whoopi Goldberg felt pressed to address the NewsBusters scoop on her place in the Epstein files. 

NewsBusters associate editor Nick Fondacaro and MRC Video content creator Nick Kangadis joined the show. While the liberal networks expressed partisan awe and amazement over Colbert's allegedly masterful interview and controversy-stoking with Texas state Rep. James Talarico, the supreme irony in all of this is that our Alex Christy reports that Colbert’s show since September 2022 has platformed 214 liberals or Democrats, and just one Republican – and that was Liz Cheney, after she left office in defeat. Equal time is never observed in late-night “comedy.” Somehow, democracy is "dying" not from a guest count of 215-0, but that anyone wants to balance it in any way. 

This whole controversy was a stunt – a stunt designed to promote Talarico’s bid for the Senate as a sort of Beto O’Rourke 2.0 – as if the original Beto was a winner. If the FCC required “equal time” here right before the primary, the beneficiary would be Rep. Jasmine Crockett, not a Republican. So Colbert’s stunt is anti-Crockett. Alex pointed out this week that it's been a long time since these late-night "comedy" broadcasts have featured an actual Republican candidate for office -- for example, Jimmy Fallon's last Republican candidate guest was Donald Trump in 2016, when Fallon was ostracized for mussing Trump's hair and "humanizing" him.

Two weeks after Fondacaro broke the story for NewsBusters that Whoopi Goldberg was not only referenced in the Epstein files but her team requested to borrow Jeffrey Epstein’s private jet to get to a charity event in Monaco, The View finally discussed the matter. Never addressing why HIS jet was requested, the rest of the cast came to Goldberg’s defense, claiming she didn’t fly anywhere, and trying to put the focus on President Trump instead.

All this made our point: your name merely showing up in the Epstein files doesn’t make you a horrible person by association, even if the Left has tried to do that with Donald Trump.

Enjoy the podcast over the weekend. The video is below. The audio is here. Give a click to two Nicks. 

POLL: What Was the Worst Media Quote of the Week?

Newsbusters
POLL: What Was the Worst Media Quote of the Week?

POLL: What Was the Worst Media Quote of the Week?

Geoffrey Dickens
February 20th, 2026 9:55 AM

POLL: What was the worst media quote of the week? (Vote below)

 

 

NOMINEES: 

 

David Muir: Trump Is Going to Destroy the Planet and Kill You

“Tonight, President Trump has repealed U.S. power to regulate climate in this country. The president officially rejecting the science. And what this now clears the way for. Critics tonight arguing this is not only dangerous for the environment but for your health.”
— Anchor David Muir on ABC’s World News Tonight, February 12. 

 

CBS Reporter David Schecter Injects Climate Propaganda into the Nation’s Founding

Correspondent David Schecter: “So, it turns out, around the time Washington looked out on the icy Delaware, there were two important pictures coming into focus: One, the story of America; the other, the beginnings of climate change. And both continue to shape our world. I kind of like to think about George Washington showing back up in 2026 and saying-”
Eric Steig, glaciologist: “What have you done?”
Schecter: “This is pretty different!”
— CBS Sunday Morning, February 15. 

 

Clueless Ed O’Keefe: When Has Anybody Called Trump Racist? 

CBS senior White House correspondent Ed O’Keefe: “Today in his statement about Jesse Jackson, the President said, ‘Despite the fact that I’m falsely and consistently called a racist by the scoundrels and lunatics on the radical left, Democrats all, it was always my pleasure to help Jesse along the way.’ Where or when does the President believe he’s been falsely called racist?”
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt: “You’re kidding, right?”
O’Keefe: “No.” 
— White House Press Briefing, February 18.    

 

 

Sponsored by James P. Jimirro

Colbert Claims Prince Andrew Was Arrested For What Trump Campaigned On

Newsbusters
Colbert Claims Prince Andrew Was Arrested For What Trump Campaigned On

Colbert Claims Prince Andrew Was Arrested For What Trump Campaigned On

Alex Christy
February 20th, 2026 9:46 AM

CBS’s Stephen Colbert continued his years-long streak of not being censored by President Trump on Thursday as he quipped that the man formerly known as Prince Andrew was arrested for abuse of power in office, which is exactly what Trump campaigned on.

Colbert reported how "the former Prince Andrew was arrested following revelations in the Epstein files… Technically, this arrest isn't about any charges of pedophilia. U.K. authorities busted Andrew for misconduct in public office, which is defined as 'serious willful abuse or neglect of the power or responsibilities of the public office held.’"

 

 

According to Colbert, that “is not only not illegal in the United States, it was Trump's campaign slogan.”

Reaching for some form of evidence, Colbert moved on to another topic, “Back here in the colonies, it was a big day for Donald Trump. Today, he held the inaugural meeting of his Board of Peace, which is kinda like the U.N., except instead of passing binding resolutions, you pass a greasy bag of money to Donald Trump because a permanent seat is $1 billion in cash, and Donald Trump is chairman for life. So, the Board of Peace works like a strip club: cash only, and Donald Trump will never leave.”

It is ironic Colbert mentioned the U.N. because the $1 billion payment is supposed to support the Board’s Gaza reconstruction efforts, and it is pretty much impossible for any organization to do any worse in Gaza than the U.N. If you want to talk about abuse of power, look no further than UNRWA.

Here is a transcript for the February 19 show:

CBS The Late Show with Stephen Colbert

2/19/2026

11:37 PM ET

STEPHEN COLBERT: Also because this morning, the former Prince Andrew was arrested following revelations in the Epstein files. Yes! Finally, someone, anyone! Let's hear it! Let's hear it for British justice! Which is better than American justice, because it comes with frilly wigs. As Andrew was being driven away by police, a photographer snapped this photo. It's a classic pose known as "The Nosferatu." Technically, this arrest isn't about any charges of pedophilia. U.K. authorities busted Andrew for misconduct in public office, which is defined as "serious willful abuse or neglect of the power or responsibilities of the public office held." Which is not only not illegal in the United States, it was Trump's campaign slogan.

Back here in the colonies, it was a big day for Donald Trump. Today, he held the inaugural meeting of his Board of Peace, which is kinda like the U.N., except instead of passing binding resolutions, you pass a greasy bag of money to Donald Trump because a permanent seat is $1 billion in cash, and Donald Trump is chairman for life. So, the Board of Peace works like a strip club: cash only, and Donald Trump will never leave.

Column: 'Jim Crow 2.0' Smears Allowed by Democrat-Aligned 'Fact Checkers'

Newsbusters
Column: 'Jim Crow 2.0' Smears Allowed by Democrat-Aligned 'Fact Checkers'

Column: 'Jim Crow 2.0' Smears Allowed by Democrat-Aligned 'Fact Checkers'

Tim Graham
February 20th, 2026 5:41 AM

The people who call themselves the “mainstream media” have a remarkable tendency to take the minority position on an 80-20 issue, most recently on requiring voters to show a photo ID at the polls. House Republicans have passed the “SAVE Act,” while Democrats have almost unanimously opposed it.

But the American people do not. Gallup pollsters report 84 percent of Americans support requiring photo ID to vote – 98 percent of Republicans, 84 percent of independents, and 67 percent of Democrats. Large majorities of blacks and Latinos back it. Separately, 83% support the SAVE Act requiring proof of citizenship when registering to vote for the first time.

When presented with this information, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) could only toss that old Biden smear out, that the SAVE Act was “Jim Crow 2.0.” So a majority of blacks favor the return of Jim Crow? How, precisely, is asking voters for an ID comparable to segregated schools and neighborhoods and bathrooms and water fountains? Obviously, they’re comparing Republicans here to racist Southern Democrats who tried to deny blacks the right to vote. That was Jim Crow 1.0.

Sadly, CNN political reporter Zach Wolf demonstrated how united Democrats are in pushing this blatant lie, except for Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania: “I think Fetterman is the most off-message Democrat in the chamber right now….I think most Democrats would get on board with what Schumer was saying.”

Among the Democrats allowing this smear are the groups calling themselves the “independent fact-checkers.” PolitiFact has never evaluated Biden or Schumer for this “Jim Crow 2.0” nonsense. But Democrats can count on PolitiFact to attack Republicans. Amy Sherman put together an article asking “Does the US have stricter ID rules for buying beer than voting?” 

Rep. Bryan Steil (R-Wis.) pointed out he has to show an ID to buy beer, but Democrats oppose an ID at the polls. "I think it's nuts that we protect our beer in this country more than our ballots in jurisdictions," Steil said. Sherman retorted: “Comparing ID rules for purchasing alcohol and casting a ballot is about as satisfying as a warm beer on a hot day.”

Why? Sherman unloaded her carefully selected Democrat experts to lecture against the Republican. The right to vote and the right to drink beer are not the same. "Voting is a right and is a public act," said Barry Burden, University of Wisconsin political scientist. "Purchasing alcohol is a private activity."

This gets everything backwards: if voting is an important public act, more important than buying a bottle of Pabst Blue Ribbon, then why shouldn’t the voting-integrity measure of an ID requirement be more important?

Then she added the proof-of-age law doesn't exist to "protect" beer, according to Derek Clinger, a staff attorney at the University of Wisconsin law school. It is meant to prevent underage drinking. “Voter fraud is far more rare than youth alcohol consumption,” she says. Voter fraud isn’t real. “Jim Crow 2.0” is real.

Sherman also thinks it’s fine if you call Trump “Hitler.” But she did pounce on Trump on October 23, 2024 for saying on social media that Kamala Harris called him Hitler. She only quoted former Trump aide John Kelly claiming Trump admired Hitler. 

The very next day, Harris tweeted: “Donald Trump is out for unchecked power. He wants a military like Adolf Hitler had, who will be loyal to him, not our Constitution.”

PolitiFact didn’t update anything. They should be honest and call their site PartisanFact. 

Networks Mostly OMIT Attempted Terror Attack on Idaho ICE Office

Newsbusters
Networks Mostly OMIT Attempted Terror Attack on Idaho ICE Office

Networks Mostly OMIT Attempted Terror Attack on Idaho ICE Office

Jorge Bonilla
February 20th, 2026 12:02 AM

With the Minneapolis unrest off the front pages, immigration enforcement has become an afterthought on the Elitist Media evening news. And yet efforts to obstruct ICE, often violently, persist- whether or not they make the evening news. Case in point, the grotesquely underreported attempted terror attack on ICE’s office in Boise, Idaho.

ABC World News Tonight was the only evening newscast to report on this latest instance of extreme leftist violence. Watch the report in its entirety as aired on Thursday, February 19th, 2026:

DAVID MUIR: To other news, there's an urgent manhunt at this hour. A suspect accused of stealing an ambulance and then ramming it into a Homeland Security office just outside Boise, Idaho. Here’s Pierre Thomas with what he’s learned tonight.

PIERRE THOMAS: Tonight, federal and state authorities in Idaho urgently trying to find the suspect they say stole an ambulance and rammed it into a building housing U.S. Department of Homeland Security offices before then trying to set the building on fire.

TRACY BASTERRECHEA: There is no doubt this building would have been burned, putting the lives of first responders and others at risk.

THOMAS: According to Meridian police, the suspect fled Wednesday night shortly after 11:00 P.M., after being scared off by first responders and before any fire could be ignited. But police say the evidence suggests a level of premeditation.

BASTERRECHEA: The suspect drove the ambulance north through the parking lot and retrieved gas cans that had been staged in nearby vegetation.

THOMAS: While motive is not yet clear, police claim that DHS leasing office space in the building has been the subject of controversy regarding the Trump administration's immigration policy. DHS has been warning about a surge in threats against immigration officials. And while no one was injured, police are emphasizing just how dangerous the situation was. David.

MUIR: All right. Pierre Thomas from Washington on this. Pierre, thank you.

CBS and NBC did not cover this story on their respective evening newscasts, but this doesn’t mean that they weren’t interested in stories featuring an ambulance. They both covered the naked Wisconsin man who stole an ambulance with a patient inside and took it for a joyride. 

This lack of interest in ongoing domestic terrorism tracks. Two weeks ago, NBC was the sole network to report on the deranged leftist who wanted to kill Russell Vought, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

It bears noting that the CBS Evening News, which the media hall monitors call “MAGA-coded”, has whiffed on both these stories. Viewers tonight learned instead about the Massachusetts man that built a 20-foot-tall snowman.

While thankful that ABC covered the Idaho story, we take note of its light substantive touch. The ramming of the building and attempt to set it on fire are reported as separate items. But it turns out the stolen ambulance was full of propellant- gas cans strategically staged en route to the DHS offices. Per ABC’s Boise affiliate KIVI:  

Meridian Police confirmed that the ambulance, which had been parked in front of the St. Luke's Meridian Medical Center, was stolen by the suspect before being driven into the Portico North building.

Officials say the ambulance belonged to Canyon County Paramedics, and no other individuals were inside the ambulance at the time of the incident.

During a press conference on Thursday at 12 p.m., Meridian Police Chief Tracy Basterrechea said that the suspect tried to burn down the building using an "accelerant" but was unable to ignite the fire.

"Preliminary investigation indicates the suspect drove the ambulance north through the parking lot and retrieved gas cans that had been staged in nearby vegetation." - Tracy Basterrechea, Meridian Police Chief

Also not mentioned in the World News Tonight report: that the individual was masked, and that there may be a link to recent anti-ICE protests in the area.

As we've previously reported, the offices at Portico North have been leased out to the Department of Homeland Security, which has been met by swift protest from local advocacy groups. It is not yet known whether this incident is connected.

Perhaps this will be written off as mostly peaceful and not fiery, and therefore not warranting coverage. But this omission is yet another in a long trend of the Elitist Media looking the other way at violence committed by violent leftists. It wasn’t that long ago that this would’ve been covered as a violent insurrection against the United States. But things are (D)ifferent now.

I leave you with another “peaceful” protest not covered by the Elitist Media: the anti-Israel protests outside the Board of Peace meeting, featuring a dismembered and decapitated effigy of Donald Trump.

If it weren't for double standards, there would be none at all.

  1. Today's Highlights: What MRC's Media Watchdogs Are Saying
  2. NY Times Uncorks AOC Stenography: Unfair Scrutiny of Slip-ups Overshadowed 'Message'
  3. Democrats Want ICE Agents – But, Not Voters – to be Required to Show IDs, Rep. Steube Says
  4. Rubio’s Case for a Stronger West

Subcategories

Modernity News

Natural News

Newsbusters

Not the Bee

OANN

Image