Newsbusters

If any more proof was needed of how un-self-aware MSNBC really was, Charles Coleman Jr. rose to the occasion while filling in for Monday night’s The 11th Hour. To discuss a reported national security breach of the Trump administration, Coleman ostensibly interviewed Congressman Eric Swalwell (D-CA.), but in fact just let Swalwell mouth off at will, while completely ignoring the fact that Swalwell himself had been the subject of an embarrassing national security scandal.

Coleman opened up the segment on how Jeffrey Goldstein, editor-in-chief of The Atlantic magazine, had seemingly somehow been accidentally included in a White House group chat about airstrikes in Yemen that should have been secure. He then introduced Swalwell, who he mentioned had previously served on the House Intelligence Committee.

 

 

Coleman broadly invited Swalwell to “Just give me your blanket reaction to this news (…),” as though Swalwell were the perfect untarnished authority to do that.

“Pete Hegseth thinks that Pete Hegseth should be fired,” Swalwell declared:

(…) [O]n his weekend shows, he has called out people for instances of national security that were not even close to what he did… [F]or them to be gone. So it’s actually remarkable to me that… Pete Hegseth has not resigned. He should absolutely resign. He may have violated the Espionage Act… He also violated the “Don’t Be an Idiot Act.” … And so this is… very concerning… [I]t’s shocking that he’s still the secretary of defense.

What Coleman completely neglected to mention, though, was that while on that committee Swalwell himself had become embroiled in a national security scandal when it turned out that he was dating a woman named Fang Fang, who was exposed as a Chinese spy.

Regardless of the merits of Swalwell’s assessment of Hegseth, the reality was that if Eric Swalwell thought Pete Hegseth should resign, Eric Swalwell should have thought Eric Swalwell should resign. 

Far from challenging Swalwell in any way, Coleman egged him on, “how prepared are Democrats to push the call for Hegseth’s resignation? You’ve said that this is something that really should result in him leaving this post. Are Democrats ready for that fight?”

Swalwell continued:

Hey, I’m ready for it… [O]ur enemies in the world are looking at this clown show, and they’re wondering, is this the time to, maybe, invade Taiwan, cause America doesn’t have its act together?… [Y]es, we have to… call for his resignation(…)

The detail about a threat to Taiwan was especially rich considering the specific nature of Swalwell’s own personal “clown show,” but Coleman continued to overlook the elephant in the room.

A moment later, in the context of MSNBC’s party line that the Democrats were supposedly too accommodating of Trump, Coleman said to Swalwell: “I can’t help but to think about when you get on an airplane, and they say, ‘secure your mask before you secure the mask of someone else.’”

After Swalwell’s show of righteous indignation over the sanctity of national security, that analogy would in fact have been quite appropriate. MSNBC, though, flagrantly ignored the real way in which it would have been appropriate.

To view the full transcript, click “expand” to read:

MSNBC’s The 11th Hour
03/24/2025
11:25 PM

(…)

[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: WAR PLANS DIVULGED ON GROUP CHAT WITH TOP TRUMP ADMIN. OFFICIALS]

CHARLES COLEMAN JR.: The Trump administration continues to face questions after its national security team accidentally included The Atlantic’s editor-in-chief on a group chat about U.S. attack plans in Yemen. 

Here to discuss, is Democratic Congressman Eric Swalwell of California. He previously served on the House Intelligence Committee. Congressman, thank you for being here. 

REP. ERIC SWALWELL (D- CA.): My pleasure.

COLEMAN: Just give me your blanket reaction to this news about this, essentially, group chat, about military activity.

SWALWELL: Pete Hegseth thinks that Pete Hegseth should be fired. If you listen to what he has said over the years on his weekend shows, he has called out people for instances of national security that were not even close to what he did- as far as his breach- for them to be gone. 

So it’s actually remarkable to me that, as we talk right now, Pete Hegseth has not resigned. He should absolutely resign. He may have violated the Espionage Act, as some of your other guests have said. He also violated the “Don’t Be an Idiot Act.” 

And it’s also concerning that the other people in the group chat didn’t say, “Hey, should this even be on signal?” or, two, “Are we allowed to have disappearing messages considering all the records we’re supposed to keep?” and, three “Hey, who’s that number that none of us recognize?” 

And so- this is, of course, very concerning. And as someone who represents, you know, a pretty big troop community with the military base in one of the biggest cities in my district, this puts all of their security at risk. 

So, it’s shocking that he’s still the secretary of defense.

COLEMAN: Congressman, given everything that you’ve just said, how prepared are Democrats to push the call for Hegseth’s resignation? You’ve said that this is something that really should result in him leaving this post. Are Democrats ready for that fight?

SWALWELL: Hey, I’m ready for it. 

And we have to meet the moment right now, because our adversaries, our enemies in the world are looking at this clown show, and they’re wondering, is this the time to, maybe, invade Taiwan, cause America doesn’t have its act together? Is this the time, you know, for our terrorist organization to hit America, because these morons are on the watch? 

And so, yes, we have to meet this moment right now, call for his resignation, and also insist that we have all the records that they have tried to delete, so we understand just what else has been put at risk.

(…)

COLEMAN: You know, congressman, I can’t help but to think about when you get on an airplane, and they say, “secure your mask before you secure the mask of someone else.” 

Democrats right now- and this is supported by a poll from Quinnipiac- is [sic.] showing that they’re underwater with their own voters for the first time in this poll’s history. 

So while I can appreciate you going to Republican districts and having these conversations with other folks, it seems like there’s a need for you, your colleagues, and the rest of the party to really secure your actual voter base.

(…)

The Federal Trade Commission under President Donald Trump will not tolerate pro-censorship Big Tech monopolies, according to the agency’s new chairman Andrew Ferguson.

Ferguson drew the connection between Big Tech’s abuse of market power and aggressive social media censorship during Tuesday’s Free State Foundation 17th Annual Policy Conference. Ferguson promised the audience that he is “looking for exercises of market power that might reveal themselves in censorship.” 

[Story Continues on MRC Free Speech America] 

On Tuesday during a White House press pool Q&A ahead of a meeting with prospective U.S. Ambassadors, President Donald Trump gave his support to the House Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) Subcommittee as it prepares to hold a hearing Wednesday with the heads of taxpayer-funded National Public Radio (NPR) and PBS, adding “I’d be honored” if he were the president to finally defund the far-left media outlets.

Real America’s Voice White House correspondent Brian Glenn asked the question, first acknowledging “[t]he subcommittee on DOGE is going to review funding for NPR and PBS” and acknowledged it’s been a frequent Republican policy promise.

 

 

“[I]f they’re successful — I know Senator [John] Kennedy has backed it, Marjorie Taylor Greene in Congress has backed it, would you be interested in defunding and taking away taxpayer dollars to NPR and PBS,” he wondered.

Trump didn’t hesitate in declaring he “would love to do that” as continuing to fund these “very biased” outlets has been “very unfair.”

The President used the swarm of journalists gathered in the Roosevelt Room to illustrate his point about how the thought behind funding NPR and PBS is from a bygone era: “[T]here’s plenty of — look at all the media you have right now. There’s plenty of coverage. I was from a different age, and they spent more money than any other network of its type ever conceived, so the kind of money that’s being wasted and it’s a very biased view. You know that better than anybody[.]”

Adding he would “be honored to see it end,” Trump doubled down on the sheer number of outlets at the White House as proof he’s “well covered.”

Thus, he argued, continuing to give tax dollars to the two is “a waste of money” and thus couldn’t “imagine” the DOGE Subcommittee would recommend against defunding NPR and PBS since DOGE itself has already “found so much waste, fraud and abuse — hundreds of billions of dollars and just waste, fraud, abuse.”

>>Sign the petition to help us defund PBS and NPR at DefundPBSNPR.org.

ABC News co-host Joy Behar seemed to call for President Trump to be the target of a Democratic Party coup during Tuesday’s edition of The View. Behar’s crash out came in the wake of the apparent security breach involving a Signal chat group of members of Trump’s cabinet. Despite Trump not being involved in the chat at all, Behar wanted him to bear the responsibility and demanded Democrats do something to remove him from office.

“Trump said it’s the only glitch in two months. That’s not true,” Behar proclaimed as she went on to shriek about other things the administrations had done:

[L]ike remember when he fired people who control the nuclear stockpile. That was one of the glitches. (…) Remember when he accidentally cut funding for Ebola outbreak. (…) When he sent back the stock market doing the hokey-pokey, like you called it, so that we’re worried about where to put our money if we want to retire. (…) Or when they blamed Ukraine for getting attacked. They said – they said – He said Ukraine attacked Russia basically or that they were to blame for the attack. That’s four. So, that’s in two months.

“This guy has to go! I’m sorry,” Behar demanded as she called on Democrats to act. “I’m sorry. It’s done! Come on! Schumer and these Democrats —”

So Joy, how were Democrats supposed to get Trump out of office?

Democrats didn’t have the ability have the ability to impeach Trump since they didn’t control the House or the Senate; and since moderator Whoopi Goldberg proclaimed during their conversation that “we’re not dumb,” they totally knew that fact. They certainly wouldn’t get Trump’s cabinet to turn on him and invoke the 25th Amendment. That really only left violence as the solution to what Behar saw as a problem.

 

 

Behar then went on to lash out at Republicans. “And by the way, I just want to say one thing to Republican Congress, you people need to look in the mirror! Is this the country you really want to have? Come on!” she decried.

Elsewhere in their conversation about the group chat, Goldberg and co-host Sunny Hostin floated the idea of sending members of Trump’s cabinet to prison over the text messages to each other:

GOLDBERG: What should happen here? Should we be saying, lock them up?

HOSTIN: I would like to answer on the legal piece. I would like to answer on the legal piece because they may have violated several provisions of the Espionage Act, which governs the handling of national defense information. And so, what happened here apparently, in my view, ran afoul of both laws that require the retention of records and more importantly, laws related to classified information.

“A security breach this significant requires a thorough investigation, people can go to jail for something like this. There are several consequences to it,” Hostin touted.

It’s worth noting that Hostin proclaimed what she was saying to be “my view,” but she was reading from a talking points card.

Pretend independent Sara Haines apparently thought she caught DNI Tulsi Gabbard in the gotcha moment during a congressional hearing going on the same day. Haines bizarrely took issued with Gabbard not wanting to discuss classified information during the televised hearing:

And Tulsi Gabbard wrote – or tweeted March 14th, quote, “Any unauthorized release of classified information is a violation of the law and will be treated as such.” But I was just watching her in a CNN hearing and – on CNN in the hearing and she was saying that she couldn’t comment.

“So, I’m guessing those words might be haunting her earlier than she thought,” she chided.

The transcript is below. Click “expand” to read:

ABC’s The View
March 25, 2025
11:04:40 a.m. Eastern

WHOOPI GOLDBERG: So, the question is –

[Laughter]

Is he going to make good on this promise?

JOY BEHAR: Oh, yeah.

GOLDBERG: What should happen here? Should we be saying, lock them up?

[Cheers and applause]

I mean, you know what I mean.

SUNNY HOSTIN: I would like to answer on the legal piece. I would like to answer on the legal piece because they may have violated several provisions of the Espionage Act, which governs the handling of national defense information. And so, what happened here apparently, in my view [as she reads from a talking points card], ran afoul of both laws that require the retention of records and more importantly, laws related to classified information. A security breach this significant requires a thorough investigation, people can go to jail for something like this. There are several consequences to it.

(…)

11:07:49 a.m. Eastern

SARA HAINES: And Tulsi Gabbard wrote – or tweeted March 14th, quote, “Any unauthorized release of classified information is a violation of the law and will be treated as such.” But I was just watching her in a CNN hearing and – on CNN in the hearing and she was saying that she couldn’t comment. So, I’m guessing those words might be haunting her earlier than she thought.

(…)

11:15:08 a.m. Eastern

BEHAR: Trump said it’s the only glitch in two months. That’s not true.

[Laughter]

In two months —

HAINES: He called it a glitch?

BEHAR: He’s taken us to plenty of disaster areas like remember when he fired people who control the nuclear stockpile. That was one of the glitches.

GOLDBERG: Was that a glitch or was that something wrong with the internet?

BEHAR: Well —

HOSTIN: He did that.

BEHAR: Remember when he accidentally cut funding for Ebola outbreak.

GOLDBERG: Yes, I remember that.

BEHAR: When he sent back the stock market doing the hokey-pokey, like you called it, so that we’re worried about where to put our money if we want to retire.

GOLDBERG: It’s a lot of glitching.

BEHAR: Or when they blamed Ukraine for getting attacked. They said – they said – He said Ukraine attacked Russia basically or that they were to blame for the attack. That’s four. So, that’s in two months.

This guy has to go! I’m sorry.

[Applause]

BEHAR: I’m sorry. It’s done! Come on!

HAINES: One interesting thing if you –

BEHAR: Chuck Schumer and these Democrats – And by the way, I just want to say one thing to Republican Congress, you people need to look in the mirror! Is this the country you really want to have? Come on!

(…)

As PBS prepares to defend itself at a Wednesday Congressional hearing, the Monday edition of Amanpour and Company seemed oblivious to the stakes the network faces. Guest host Bianna Golodryga welcomed transgender Nashville city council member Olivia Hill to not only declare there are “at least three genders” but also that people who transition the other way acquire “male privilege,” as evidenced by the fact that nobody questions their presence in sports.

Golodryga began by noting, “Well, there’s — what we heard from Gavin Newsom and his views on the issue as it relates to fairness. But he’s not alone. Rahm Emanuel said that, quote, ‘Some kids in classroom are debating which pronouns apply. The rest of the class doesn’t know what a pronoun is. That’s the crisis.’ And we also know former Transportation Secretary under Biden, Pete Buttigieg, removed his pronouns from his profile on X recently.

She then asked, “So, I guess my question to you is, why do you think that an issue that really relates to or impacts a smaller swath of the U.S. population was not an issue that the Democratic Party could effectively challenge and address head on the way the Republicans ran with it?”

 

 

Hill began by urging Democrats to double down, “Well, the biggest thing that we have to do is we have to educate a lot of people. The thought of trans is not anything that’s new. It’s been around forever. It’s just now being start talk about, it’s just now kind of coming out into public. And the biggest thing that we have to do is educate people.”

Rolling right along, Hill added, “Because it sounds very intuitive of a man and a woman, and then when you start to throw in the mix that there is at least three genders, because we know that there’s intersex, and all the things that change once we start hormones, we take hormone blockers and we take estrogen or testosterone, depending on which way you go, that a lot of things change, and we have got to start educating people.”

Hill appeared to be using gender in the more traditional sense, where it is a synonym for sex, and not the reworked definition that says the two are separate things, but fact-check: intersex is not a third sex. It never has been and it never will be.

Golodryga later re-asked her question, “So, how do you think the Democratic Party as a whole should address this issue going forward?”

Likewise, Hill repeated, “I think we stay the way we are. We keep fighting, we keep standing up, we keep educating people and we get people like myself out there to start to talk about all the things that change. Because the biggest problem that we have in the trans community is they see trans women and drag queens as the same. And we’re not men in wigs. We’re completely different.”

Women have been competing in men’s sports for some time now. Whether they be golfers, baseball players, football kickers, or hockey goalies, no one objects to it in principle because of the differences in male and female biology. They do, however, reject men in women’s sports for the same reason, but Hill didn’t seem to understand that, “An example of that is, is you never hear any talk about trans men in sports because the biggest thing that trans men gain is male privilege. And they’re left alone. It’s only trans women who have transitioned from male to female get the misogyny and talked to less than.”

All the while, Golodryga was uninterested in correcting or challenging Hill’s biologically-challenged statements.

Here is a transcript for the March 24-taped show

PBS Amanpour & Company

3/24/2025

BIANNA GOLODRYGA: Well, there’s — what we heard from Gavin Newsom and his views on the issue as it relates to fairness. But he’s not alone. Rahm Emanuel said that, quote, “Some kids in classroom are debating which pronouns apply. The rest of the class doesn’t know what a pronoun is. That’s the crisis.” And we also know former Transportation Secretary under Biden, Pete Buttigieg, removed his pronouns from his profile on X recently.

So, I guess my question to you is, why do you think that an issue that really relates to or impacts a smaller swath of the U.S. population was not an issue that the Democratic Party could effectively challenge and address head on the way the Republicans ran with it?

OLIVIA HILL: Well, the biggest thing that we have to do is we have to educate a lot of people. The thought of trans is not anything that’s new. It’s been around forever. It’s just now being start talk about, it’s just now kind of coming out into public. And the biggest thing that we have to do is educate people. Because it sounds very intuitive of a man and a woman, and then when you start to throw in the mix that there is at least three genders, because we know that there’s intersex, and all the things that change once we start hormones, we take hormone blockers and we take estrogen or testosterone, depending on which way you go, that a lot of things change, and we have got to start educating people.

And just because someone of power or someone of knowledge starts to speak of something about the trans community, it doesn’t mean that it’s accurate or it’s true. We have to start listening to the physicians and the people that are in this community and the people that know the trans community and how we progress.

GOLODRYGA: So, how do you think the Democratic Party as a whole should address this issue going forward?

HILL: I think we stay the way we are. We keep fighting, we keep standing up, we keep educating people and we get people like myself out there to start to talk about all the things that change. Because the biggest problem that we have in the trans community is they see trans women and drag queens as the same. And we’re not men in wigs. We’re completely different.

An example of that is, is you never hear any talk about trans men in sports because the biggest thing that trans men gain is male privilege. And they’re left alone. It’s only trans women who have transitioned from male to female get the misogyny and talked to less than.

ABC’s Jimmy Kimmel was not content to merely criticize Trump Administration national security officials for discussing military operations on a civilian messaging app while unwittingly including The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg in their conversations on his Monday show; he just had to bring Fox News’s Laura Ingraham into it as well. For unexplainable reasons, Kimmel mused about how hard Ingraham’s “erection” would have been if the matter involved Biden officials.

After a clip of Trump telling reporters that he was unaware of the existence of the group chat, Kimmel declared, “Sounds like one of those ‘You tell him,’ ‘No, no, you tell him’ things, but my god. If Joe Biden’s top-level level military team had accidentally texted these plans to a journalist, Laura Ingraham’s erection would be so rock solid, it would break through the wall like the Kool-Aid Man. This is a crazy mistake by any definition.”

 

 

In three short sentences, there is much to unpack. First and most obvious is the rampant sexism. Kimmel could have simply said Ingraham would have lost her mind, and his point would have been the same. He just had to make a woman TV host is actually a man “joke.”

Second, Kimmel is also showing hypocrisy in two ways. First, Jimmy Kimmel Live! is a family affair. One of the show’s head writers is Kimmel’s wife, Molly McNearney. For McNearney, jokes about Hillary Clinton and her pantsuits are simply too sexist to tell. As for Kimmel himself, he told a grand total of zero jokes about Biden’s Secretary of Defense, Lloyd Austin, and his AWOL scandal.

The Secretary of Defense should not be discussing military operations on a civilian app, but he also shouldn’t disappear for extended periods of time without telling the president, and alleged comedians shouldn’t accuse others of hypocrisy around national security or sexism when they are the hypocritical ones.

Here is a transcript for the March 24 show:

ABC Jimmy Kimmel Live!

3/24/2025

11:43 PM ET

JIMMY KIMMEL: Sounds like one of those “You tell him,” “No, no, you tell him” things, but my god. If Joe Biden’s top level military team had accidentally texted these plans to a journalist, Laura Ingraham’s erection would be so rock solid, it would break through the wall like the Kool-Aid man. This is a crazy mistake by any definition. 

In an interview that aired Sunday on NBC’s Dallas-Fort Worth-area affiliate KXAS and went viral on X Monday, Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett (D-TX) talked repeatedly about wanting to beat up and repeatedly “punch” Texas Republican Senator Ted Cruz.

Leaving aside her sudden code switching in the last year, the incendiary rhetoric is the sort of thing ABC, CBS, and NBC would look to call out if the parties were reversed. Unsurprisingly, they ignored it on their flagship Monday evening and Tuesday morning news shows, thus giving their tacit approval. CNN and MSNBC were also uninterested.

Here was Crockett’s full comment:

I — think that you punch. I think you punch. I think with — you — you okay with punching. You know, I think — and I love Colin [Allred], and I think, towards the end, he started to punch a little harder, But, like, it Ted Cruz. I mean, like, this dude has to be knocked over the head, like hard, right? Like, there is no niceties with him. Like, it all. Like, you — you go clean off on him, right?

She went onto defend this line of thinking because “we’re dealing with an administration that is lawless and disrespectful and so the idea that we’re still going to be nice and friendly and kind and try to look for some sense of normalcy when we’re literally living in a time that is anything but normal. I think that we’ve got to get comfortable with letting our hair down a little bit.”

There were only two tertiary mentions of Crockett’s incendiary rhetoric coming on CNN, courtesy of The Arena host Kasie and then former MSNBC host Tiffany Cross on CNN Thunderome (aka CNN NewsNight), but both alluded to Crockett also having said “all I want for my birthday is for Elon [Musk] to be taken down.” 

Multiple Fox News Channel, Fox Business Network, and Newsmax shows didn’t let this go. Tuesday’s Fox & Friends First played it twice, including in a tease from co-host Carley Shimkus blasting Crockett’s “very blunt approach.”

After a break, co-host Todd Piro cued up the clip: “Democrats once again appearing to endorse threats against Republicans. This time from Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett.”

Shimkus then asked our friend and Fox News contributor Joe Concha acknowledging this “certainly doesn’t help” Democrats recover from record-low polling and no clear leader.

 

 

Concha unloaded by citing the dangerous political climate, including two assassination attempts on now-President Trump last year. He and Piro also called out Crockett’s half-hearted claims she was simply joking (click “expand”):

CONCHA: Yeah, Carley, I mean, Jasmine Crockett, in the past few days, has called for Elon Musk to be “taken down.” She wants that as the present for her birthday. Then, as you just played, advocating punching opponents like Ted Cruz — “has to be knocked over the head, like, hard.” Lest you forget there were — what — two assassination attempts on Donald Trump’s life last year? One that, if he didn’t turn very hard to the right, he would have been assassinated on national television. This sort of rhetoric cannot stand. But I guess this is what gets you on CNN, MSNBC, or wherever she was being interviewed on that particular clip yesterday. She is booked all the time because she says things like this, so I guess expect it to continue. But if you’re a responsible network, you would say, alright, we can’t put somebody on this that’s advocating violence against her opponents, but that’s exactly what’s happening. That’s what gets rewarded and that’s a shame.

PIRO: Yeah, she went on to say that, no, I’m not inciting violence in no way, shape, or form. What do you make of that, sort of — I can’t even call it a walk-back attempt — that attempt at a walk-back?

CONCHA: It — it’s not. It’s — it’s — look, it’s a wink, wink, nod, nod that, yeah, of course, I’m not advocating — just like when Jimmy Kimmel said last week, like, please, don’t go out and vandalize Teslas and kinda like smiles and gives a wink to the camera. That — that’s all it is. This is exactly — she knows what she’s doing and when we saw that poll come out last week, which Democrat espouses Democrat values most — they asked Democratic voters, she came in fourth behind AOC and Bernie Sanders. So, she’s up there as far as being front and center and some Democratic voters like this stuff — the extreme ones, anyway — and I guess that’s her game plan to continue to appeal to the crazies.

Between Monday night and Tuesday morning, the networks had other ideas. On Monday’s CBS Evening News, it’s “Eye on America” segment warned about the decline of Florida’s orange industry due to climate change and predicting the Trump team’s criticism of federal judges could lead to them (and their families) being violently attacked or even killed.

Come early Tuesday, ABC’s Good Morning America opened its second hour with news stories on the weather and…spring sales at Amazon. Morning news shows are notorious for touting deals from major retailers, but having it in place of a major news story is far less common.

And, at NBC’s Today, the crew fawned over 81-year-old Robert de Niro claiming he watches The Wiggles and YouTube host “Ms. Rachel” with his two-year-old daughter.

To see the relevant FNC transcript from March 25, click “expand.”

FNC’s Fox & Friends First
March 25, 2025
5:19 a.m. Eastern [TEASE]

[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Blunt Approach]

CARLEY SHIMKUS: Texas Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett has a very blunt approach to her — to beat Republicans in her state.

CONGRESSWOMAN JASMINE CROCKETT (D-TX): I think that you punch. I think you punch. I think with — you — you okay with punching. [SCREEN WIPE] But, like, it Ted Cruz. I mean, like, this dude has to be knocked over the head.

[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Next: Joe Concha Live]

SHIMKUS: Hmmm. We’re going to ask Joe Concha why Democrats seem to think fighting is the answer, coming up next

(….)

5:25 a.m. Eastern

[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Rep Crockett: Dems Need to Be Okay with Punching]

TODD PIRO: Democrats once again appearing to endorse threats against Republicans. This time from Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett.

CROCKETT: I think that you punch. I think you punch. I think with — you — you okay with punching. [SCREEN WIPE] But, like, it Ted Cruz. I mean, like, this dude has to be knocked over the head, like hard, right? Like, there is no niceties with him.

SHIMKUS: Fox News contributor and senior writer for the Washington Examiner Joe Concha joins us now. Joe, good morning to you. So, Axios had a piece yesterday claiming that Democrats are in a deep hole with no party leader and the lowest favorability record ever. And comments like this from Jasmine Crockett talking about punching, whether verbal or otherwise, certainly doesn’t help the cause.

JOE CONCHA: Yeah, Carley, I mean, Jasmine Crockett, in the past few days, has called for Elon Musk to be “taken down.” She wants that as the present for her birthday. Then, as you just played, advocating punching opponents like Ted Cruz — “has to be knocked over the head, like, hard.” Lest you forget there were — what — two assassination attempts on Donald Trump’s life last year? One that, if he didn’t turn very hard to the right, he would have been assassinated on national television. This sort of rhetoric cannot stand. But I guess this is what gets you on CNN, MSNBC, or wherever she was being interviewed on that particular clip yesterday. She is booked all the time because she says things like this, so I guess expect it to continue. But if you’re a responsible network, you would say, alright, we can’t put somebody on this that’s advocating violence against her opponents, but that’s exactly what’s happening. That’s what gets rewarded and that’s a shame.

PIRO: Yeah, she went on to say that, no, I’m not inciting violence in no way, shape, or form. What do you make of that, sort of — I can’t even call it a walk-back attempt — that attempt at a walk-back?

[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Dems Struggle to Find Message Against GOP]

CONCHA: It — it’s not. It’s — it’s — look, it’s a wink, wink, nod, nod that, yeah, of course, I’m not advocating — just like when Jimmy Kimmel said last week, like, please, don’t go out and vandalize Teslas and kinda like smiles and gives a wink to the camera. That — that’s all it is. This is exactly — she knows what she’s doing and when we saw that poll come out last week, which Democrat espouses Democrat values most — they asked Democratic voters, she came in fourth behind AOC and Bernie Sanders. So, she’s up there as far as being front and center and some Democratic voters like this stuff — the extreme ones, anyway — and I guess that’s her game plan to continue to appeal to the crazies.

Media Research Center data indicates that Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s pledge to implement pro-free speech policies across Meta appears to have had an almost immediate impact.

“Zuckerberg has put his money where his mouth is,” said MRC Vice President Dan Schneider. “And he’s fulfilling his promises. Meta still needs to do what’s right for all those conservative outlets that it previously censored, but I’m willing to give credit where credit is due.”

MRC has seen a substantial boost in traffic to its websites from social media, particularly from Meta-owned Facebook and Instagram.

Typically, from December to February, MRC experiences an increase of 10-20 percent in monthly site visits from social media. However, between December 2024 and February 2025, MRC websites saw a staggering 117 percent increase in traffic—far surpassing the 16 percent growth over the same period a year prior.

“As former President Ronald Reagan so eloquently put, ‘Trust, but verify,’” said Ed Molchany, the MRC chief operating officer. “Early indications are that Zuckerberg is doing what he said he would do with his platforms, and the free speech reforms are welcome. But there’s still a long way to go before Meta can earn the trust of conservatives who have been the target of Big Tech censorship for many years.”

The not-insignificant readership boost from social media users followed Zuckerberg’s Jan.7 announcement that Meta would overhaul its content moderation policies—long criticized for its strict censorship mandates. MRC researchers have recorded a whopping total of 1,728 documented cases of censorship for Meta platforms in our unique CensorTrack.org database, making Meta responsible for approximately 21 percent of the total entries.

Among the changes, Meta canceled its third-party fact-checking program, lifted restrictions on posts about gender and immigration and revamped its algorithms to allow users to see political content if they so choose.

Instead of relying on biased so-called fact-checkers, Zuckerberg has determined his platforms will roll out a Community Notes system, similar to Elon Musk’s X, where users flag posts containing alleged misleading or false information. Communities Notes have long been criticized as another censorship tool. However, unlike X, Meta promises its system will not penalize or remove the monetization of accounts that receive a community note, according to Meta Global Affairs Officer Joel Kaplan.  

“The third-party fact-checking program, in addition to the bias, had penalties attached to it, where if something was rated false, we would dramatically reduce its distribution,” Kaplan said earlier this month. “And that turned a program that was intended to be about providing additional information into one that was essentially a censorship tool.”

In a now-viral video posted on Meta, Zuckerberg explained that it was time for Meta-owned platforms to “get back around our roots of free expression.”

“I started building social media to give people a voice,” he stated, recalling his 2019 speech at Georgetown University, where he described free speech as the driving force behind American progress.

“[S]ome people believe that giving more people a voice is driving division rather than bringing people together,” Zuckerberg stated in 2019. “More people across the spectrum believe that achieving the political outcomes that they think matter is more important than every person having a voice and being heard, and I think that that’s dangerous.”

Zuckerberg’s remarks followed the overwhelming rejection of Democratic Party rule and the Biden administration’s censorship initiatives in the November 2024 election.

Zuckerberg himself condemned the administration’s push for Big Tech companies to crack down on constitutionally-protected posts. Among those censored were fact-based discussions on vaccines, the origins of COVID-19 and criticism of mask and vaccine mandates.

Time will tell if these changes will last, or if this is merely a political stop-gap to curry favor amidst a swell of pro-free speech fervor.

Conservatives are under attack. Contact Meta and other tech companies and encourage them to continue to push for more pro-American, pro-free speech policies. Let the platforms know that the American people will continue to be vigilant to keep a watchful eye on changes that might show a return to tech’s recent, not-easily-forgotten anti-free speech past.

If vandalism, arson, and domestic terrorism were your idea of a good laugh, then you would have got a kick out of The Daily Show. On his CNN show Smerconish Saturday morning, Michael Smerconish defied the media’s obsessive demonization of Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), and called attention to how the anti-Musk fixation had, in some cases, turned outright criminal, and some of the media, far from condemning it, actually seemed to revel in it.

“Hey, have you heard?” Smerconish opened, “The Tesla car has a new option: flaming or non-flaming.” He explained:

Not to make light of a serious issue. It’s just that an innocent electric car, once the symbol of proud progressives trying to save the planet, has become the focus of misplaced hate. The fight that they’ve got is with Tesla Motors owner Elon Musk…As one Instagram post has it, “let’s send these technofascists, broligarchs and old fashioned Nazis a message loud and clear.” Harsh words, if only it remained just words. Unfortunately, some anti-Muskers believe actions speak louder, and so… people are attacking Teslas. They’ve defaced them, they’ve shot at them, they’ve even thrown Molotov cocktails at them, proving that gasoline and Teslas don’t mix. 

Smerconish acknowledged he sounded a bit flippant considering he was talking about serious criminal behavior, but went on, “[A]t least I’m laughing with Tesla, not the attackers. Contrast that with ‘The Daily Show’ audience.”

The screen then cut to Jordan Klepper of The Daily Show, who gleefully pronounced, “Some people are not content to just scream about Elon in a high school gym, they’re taking to the streets or- the parking lots.”

He then showed actual footage of Tesla vehicles being vandalized and set ablaze, to which the audience hooted with merriment. 

“Wow, you guys like petty acts of domestic terrorism, huh?” Klepper asked, to laughter and applause.

Smerconish pointed out that the crowd’s reaction was reminiscent of how many like them went to pieces over Luigi Mangione, the alleged assassin of the health insurance CEO Brian Thompson, who had become sort of a far-left folk hero when charged with the crime. 

After playing a clip of Governor Tim Walz of Minnesota (D), joking about how Tesla stock had plummeted, Smerconish cited an FBI PSA showing that law enforcement took the emerging threat quite seriously, and mentioned the existence of a website devoted solely to doxxing Tesla owners and dealerships. 

Smerconish expressed alarm at how many callers on his own show were “eager to rationalize all the violence,” and quoted a tweet by President Trump in which he said he “look[ed] forward to watching the sick terrorist thugs get 20-year jail sentences for what they’re doing to Elon Musk and Tesla.”

“Trump expresses himself in his usual unrestrained way,” Smerconish said, “but… there seems to be a point. These attacks don’t just damage cars… they create an aura of fear … And that’s how terror works, isolated examples of violence making millions feel unsafe.” 

Smerconish had no hesitation about just coming out and saying that terrorism is not OK, but apparently for Jordan Klepper and The Daily Show, that would have been going out on too much of a limb. 

To view the full transcript, click ‘expand’ to read

CNN’s Smerconish

03/24/2025

9:00 AM

MICHAEL SMERCONISH, CNN ANCHOR: Hey, have you heard? The Tesla car has a new option: flaming or non-flaming. I’m Michael Smerconish in Philadelphia.

Not to make light of a serious issue. It’s just that an innocent electric car, once the symbol of proud progressives trying to save the planet, has become the focus of misplaced hate. The fight that they’ve got is with Tesla Motors owner Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency, which they claim is dismantling government. And that’s a nice way of putting it, sometimes they call it a coup, and Musk a Nazi.

Next Saturday on March 29, protesters around the world will participate in a Tesla takedown with 500 demonstrations at Tesla showrooms. As one Instagram post has it, “let’s send these technofascists, broligarchs and old fashioned Nazis a message loud and clear.” 

Harsh words, if only it remained just words. Unfortunately, some anti-Muskers believe actions speak louder, and so, around the world, people are attacking Teslas. They’ve defaced them, they’ve shot at them, they’ve even thrown Molotov cocktails at them, proving that gasoline and Teslas don’t mix. 

And sorry if you thought that joke was in bad taste, but at least I’m laughing with Tesla, not the attackers. Contrast that with “The Daily Show” audience.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JORDAN KLEPPER, “THE DAILY SHOW” CO-HOST: Some people are not content to just scream about Elon in a high school gym, they’re taking to the streets or- the parking lots.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Tonight, the FBI and ATF now investigating multiple cases of possible arson targeting Teslas and Cybertrucks.

This dramatic video shows multiple cars in flames. Police say the attacker used Molotov cocktails. It’s the latest in more than a dozen instances of arson and vandalism targeting Tesla.

The same suspect shot more Teslas with a gun. Tesla Cybertrucks were set on fire in Kansas City. And earlier this month, shots fired at a Tesla dealership in Oregon. Cybertrucks on fire in Seattle.

AUDIENCE: [APPLAUSE]

KLEPPER: Wow, you guys like petty acts of domestic terrorism, huh?

AUDIENCE: [LAUGHTER]

SMERCONISH: The crowd’s reaction reminds me of those who cheered for Luigi Mangione, after he was charged for the murder of a healthcare executive. Likely due, at least in part, to Musk’s unpopularity, the value of Tesla Motors has plummeted, sales have slumped. Some are cheering the decline.

TIM WALZ: They’ve got that little stock app. I added Tesla to it to give me a little boost during the day. 2.25 and dropping.

SMERCONISH: Others are calling on Musk to step down as CEO. 

This is a lot more than a business story. The question becomes, what do you do about the perpetrators? And discussing it on my Sirius XM radio program this week, I was surprised at the number of my callers eager to rationalize all the violence. 

But the FBI certainly isn’t doing that, they issued a PSA warning the public to be on the lookout for various indicators that could be precursors to planned attacks. The Trump administration is also taking it seriously. Attorney General Pam Bondi called the attacks “Nothing short of domestic terrorism.” She’s already charged three individuals with Tesla-related violence. 

According to the DOJ, one man, while armed with an AR15 rifle, threw approximately eight Molotov cocktails at a dealership in Salem, Oregon. A woman in Loveland, Colorado tried to light Teslas on fire with Molotov cocktails and was later found with materials that could produce more incendiary weapons. A man in Charleston, South Carolina wrote profane messages against President Trump at Tesla charging stations before lighting the stations on fire with Molotov cocktails. 

In response, President Trump posted on Truth Social a message of his own, “I look forward to watching the sick terrorist thugs get 20-year jail sentences for what they’re doing to Elon Musk and Tesla. Perhaps they could serve them in the prisons of El Salvador, which have become so recently famous for such lovely conditions.”

Trump expresses himself in his usual unrestrained way, but behind the no-holds-barred response, there seems to be a point. These attacks don’t just damage cars and car lots and charging stations, they create an aura of fear for all who own Teslas or might want to own one. And that’s how terror works, isolated examples of violence making millions feel unsafe. No doubt that’s why anti-Tesla militants have doxxed Tesla people. 

One website called “Dogequest” put out an interactive map revealing the names, addresses and phone numbers of Tesla owners, as well as Tesla dealerships throughout the U.S. The map uses the image of a Molotov cocktail as a cursor. Those in charge of the site do promise, however, to remove people’s information if they can prove they’ve sold their car. 

Hey, here’s a consistency test for you. Anyone who objected to the notorious 2010 Sarah Palin map, you remember? The one that listed representatives in close districts who voted for Obamacare and put crosshairs on their districts? Well, they ought to be offended by the map now being used to single out Tesla people.  

Fresh off of blaming Americans for ruining Spring, CBS anchor John Dickerson delivers another hollow, moralistic editorial from his “Reporter’s Notebook” segment which closes out the CBS Evening News Plus.

Watch the editorial in its entirety, as aired on CBS Evening News Plus on Monday, March 25th, 2025:

Another day, another pompous editorial by CBS’s John Dickerson. This time, lamenting that Donald Trump wields the awesome powers of the presidency pic.twitter.com/98r1mh8w0O
— Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) March 25, 2025

JOHN DICKERSON: “Give me liberty or –” you likely know how it ends. 250 years ago yesterday, Patrick Henry said, “Give me liberty or give me death” at St. John’s Church in Richmond, Virginia, a pure defiant cry for freedom stamped in speeches, textbooks, and our national memory. July 4th, 2026 will mark America’s 250th birthday. Henry’s cry summoned the midwife. In a proclamation, President Trump quoted Thomas Jefferson: “Henry was before us all in maintaining the spirit of the Revolution.” Like many founding stories, this may not be what Henry actually said. The version we know was written down 42 years after the speech, revealing more about how we choose to remember our history than what actually happened. Unlike the mythic glow of the American Revolution, there are real-time accounts of Henry’s speeches during another pivotal moment: the ratification of the Constitution. He was not on the winning side. He didn’t even go to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, reportedly saying: “I smell a rat in Philadelphia, tending towards monarchy.” He opposed the Constitution with the passion he once used to ignite revolution, this time fearing the presidency itself could become an absolute tyranny. “If your American chief be a man of ambition, how easy it is for him to render himself absolute. What have you to oppose this force?,” he asked of the presidency. “What will then become of you and your rights? Will not absolute despotism ensue?” Quotes from the Founders are used to pierce the cloud of the present with moral clarity from the past. 250 years later, as presidential powers have expanded far beyond the Founders’ vision, and as the current occupant seeks ever more, Henry’s words are not a quotation FOR The White House, but a warning about it.

I don’t recall Dickerson ever winding up a historical reference-laden editorial on the pitfalls of expanded executive power when Joe Biden and his proxies wielded it. We don’t recall Dickerson conjuring up some quote on the damage ensuing from presidential corruption of the pardon power, or on the potential dangers to our constitutional order ensuing from repeated attempts to circumvent the Supreme Court.

We don’t get any of that from Dickerson, who ultimately reminds us that there is no constitutional crisis except that Donald Trump is who wields Article II power and therefore the left and their media proxies are in crisis. Dickerson has no problem when Democrat presidents expand presidential power. It is only when the Bad Orange Man sits behind the Resolute Desk that these things are a problem.

This editorial, as smug and condescending as the others, serves to remind us that behind the mask of news anchor and “historian” (like so many others in media) lies little more than a bitter partisan, minus the dignity of those who are transparent with their partisanship- not hiding it behind florid, verbose editorials.