Newsbusters

On Monday afternoon, MSNBC host Katy Tur gave a forum to die-hard climate doomsayer Michael Mann to complain about EPA administrator Lee Zeldin’s moves to cut regulations as the environmental alarmist also renewed the worn-out claim that the world only has a decade left to reduce with carbon emissions. On MSNBC, no one notices that the climate fearmongers were saying this “one decade” stuff in 1990. 

The MSNBC host began the segment by informing viewers of a recent statement by Zeldin. Here’s Tur:

The Environmental Protection Agency is trying to repeal dozens of environmental regulations, chief among them a landmark finding from 2009 that said greenhouse gases threaten public health of current and future generations. In an op-ed written in the Wall Street Journal, EPA administrator (Lee) Zeldin writes: “We are driving a dagger through the heart of the climate change religion and ushering in America’s Golden Age.”

Tur brought aboard Mann as a guest and began by posing: “What is Lee Zeldin’s job as head of the EPA?” That’s a softball, leading the guest to say Zeldin isn’t interested in “environmental protection.” 

After Professor Mann declared that Zeldin’s job “is certainly not what he’s doing here,” Tur followed up by wondering why the EPA administrator declared that some of his goals are to lower the cost of living for Americans: “What’s he talking about, trying to make the cost of a car less and heating a home and running a business? There are other agencies for that.”

Mann took the opportunity to link Zeldin to “plutocrats” and “funders of climate change denial,” and repeated claims that recent extreme weather is “unprecedented.” 

…this is historical revisionism. Lee Zeldin has close ties to polluters. He has close ties to the Koch brothers that are the major funders of climate change denial and the assault on renewable energy and the promotion of greenhouse gases — of fossil fuels. And so what he’s doing is the bidding of the powerful plutocrats rather than what he is supposed to be doing — the bidding of the American people, protecting them from threats to the environment.

The most severe threat to the environment for today to public health and welfare being the effects of human-caused climate change — the unprecedented heat waves and wildfires and flood and tornado outbreaks that we’ve seen these damaging and deadly results of human-caused warming. That’s what he’s supposed to be protecting people against, and he’s doing the opposite.

After Tur argued that there seems to be a mixed message for HHS secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to warn about the dangers of microplastics and other chemicals people consume while the EPA is not being so stringent about trying to reduce carbon emissions, Mann complained:

…there’s no intellectual consistency here because there’s no honesty here. They’re not really trying to address the major threats to the health of Americans. What they’re trying to do is simply pad the profits of the fossil fuel interests — the polluters who got them there. And that litany of things that you read off — that doesn’t even include climate change. So there are all the other health impacts — air quality, water quality — taking into account the most devastating consequence of carbon pollution — climate change.

Transcript follows:

MSNBC’s Katy Tur Reports

March 17, 2025

3:39 p.m. Eastern

KATY TUR: The Environmental Protection Agency is trying to repeal dozens of environmental regulations, chief among them a landmark finding from 2009 that said greenhouse gases threaten public health of current and future generations. In an op ed written in the Wall Street Journal, EPA administrator (Lee) Zeldin writes: “We are driving a dagger through the heart of the climate change religion and ushering in America’s Golden Age.”

Joining us now, Presidential Distinguished Professor of Earth and Environmental Science at the University of Pennsylvania, Michael Mann. What is Lee Zeldin’s job as head of the EPA?

PROFESSOR MICHAEL MANN, UNIVERISTY OF PENNSYLVANIA: Yeah, hi, Katy, it’s good to be with you. And I’ll tell you, his job is certainly not what he’s doing here. His job is right in the title — “Environmental Protection Agency.” They’re supposed to be protecting the environment. They’re supposed to be protecting people. They’re supposed to be protecting them from things that endanger public health and welfare like greenhouse gases that are causing warming. That’s what the Endangerment — the so-called “Endangerment Finding” represents, and they’re trying to overturn that. 

TUR: They — or Lee Zeldin says: “The EPA was created to lower the cost of buying a car, heating a home and running a business.” The original EPA administer put it — administrator put it differently, though, writing in a press release, “The agency has no obligation to promote agriculture or commerce — only the critical obligation to protect and enhance the environment.” What’s he talking about, trying to make the cost of a car less and heating a home and running a business? There are other agencies for that.

MANN: Well, I’ll tell you what he’s talking about. Yeah, I mean, this is historical revisionism. Lee Zeldin has close ties to polluters. He has close ties to the Koch brothers that are the major funders of climate change denial and the assault on renewable energy and the promotion of greenhouse gases — of fossil fuels. And so what he’s doing is the bidding of the powerful plutocrats rather than what he is supposed to be doing — the bidding of the American people, protecting them from threats to the environment. The most severe threat to the environment for today to public health and welfare being the effects of human-caused climate change — the unprecedented heat waves and wildfires and flood and tornado outbreaks that we’ve seen these damaging and deadly results of human-caused warming. That’s what he’s supposed to be protecting people against, and he’s doing the opposite.

TUR: We saw the storms that just happened over the weekend. We’ve been covering all these major storms — this more extreme weather now — for years. What is it going to mean, though, to roll back some of these more landmark decisions in terms of the immediate? What’s it going to mean for the quality of our air — for the quality of our water?

MANN: Well, I’ll tell you what it means, you know. We’ve got to reduce carbon emissions by 50 percent over the next decade if we are to avert even worse consequences than those we’re already feeling. And what this is going to do is put a halt to all progress at the federal level in the United States when it comes to addressing the climate crisis — when it comes to reducing carbon emissions. Worse than that, the United States — we are the world’s biggest legacy carbon polluter. We’ve put more carbon pollution into the atmosphere than any other country. And that’s all the climate cares about — the total amount of climate pollution. We’ve contributed more to the ravages of climate change that we’re feeling now than any other country, and for us to back off from our own commitments and to cede leadership says to the rest of the world that the world’s biggest polluter is unwilling to do their part, it makes it easier for other countries to shirk their own responsibilities, and, pretty soon, any meaningful global policy progress on climate falls apart.

TUR: So there are 31 rules that are earmarked for them to get rid of, and this is waste water discharges for oil and gas extraction facilities; oil and gas industry reporting through a greenhouse gas program; rules governing coal ash and coal-fired power plants; national air quality standards for industrial air pollutants; rules to produce air pollution that cause haze; regulations restricting vehicle emissions. There’s this whole healthy movement in this country — you see it all over social media. RFK Jr. has been capitalizing on it, saying that, you know, you need to reduce the amount of toxins that you’re putting in your body — we’re all consuming all these microplastics — we’re all consuming all these chemicals in food — we need to go back to the original way of things. Okay, great. This seems to fly directly in the face of that. You’re putting more pollutants, more chemicals, more hazards into the air at the same time that we’re allegedly also in MAHA.

MANN: Yeah, I mean, there’s no intellectual consistency here because there’s no honesty here. They’re not really trying to address the major threats to the health of Americans. What they’re trying to do is simply pad the profits of the fossil fuel interests — the polluters who got them there. And that litany of things that you read off — that doesn’t even include climate change. So there are all the other health impacts — air quality, water quality — taking into account the most devastating consequence of carbon pollution — climate change.

TUR: All right, Michael Mann, thank you very much for being with us.

There is a tendency among some people to believe that, unlike other late night hosts, Jon Stewart goes after both sides. However, that is only really true if you consider going after Democrats for not being left enough to be equal treatment. On Monday’s edition of Comedy Central’s The Daily Show, Stewart ranted at Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer for not shutting down the government and later welcomed Sen. Chris Murphy to echo his opinion.

Playing the role of someone inclined to give Schumer the benefit of the doubt, Stewart declared, “You got me going, Chucky. You probably got a little something out of this, didn’t you. Ole C-Schoo, you wouldn’t have given up that powerful leverage on the budget for nothing! My guess is, Chucky got some cheese.”

 

 

After playing an MSNBC video reporting that Schumer did not, Stewart settled into airing his genuine feelings, “Senator Schumer, no disrespect, but you are a disgrace to Jewish stereotypes about financial negotiations.  That is just, I thought the whole point of us is that is what we do! But you are out there, ‘How much is it?’ ‘$5.’ ‘How about I give you $7!’ Like, what are you doing? And for those of you who may have felt it was a total capitulation, Senator Schumer just felt like this wasn’t the moment for Democrats to press their case, because Trump is still too strong.”

After a clip of Schumer claiming that Republicans will be more willing to work with them when Trump’s approval rating hits 40 percent, Stewart ranted a bit before playing another clip that reported that the Democratic Party’s approval sits at 27 percent.

Following that, Stewart added, “You’re at 27 percent! You’ve got to get Trump to lose eight points of popularity just for you to get to the point where you’re 13 points below him! Your approval is only seven points above where it turns red and goes into low power mode.”

 

 

Mocking the way Schumer wears his glasses, Stewart rolled on, “Maybe a visual demonstration of where you’re at. Let me meet you where you [bleep] live! All right. Here we go! Let me do this! This is 48 percent approval! This is them! This is you. This is you. 27 percent! This is them! ‘Oh, I see, they are much higher.’ Yes, they are much higher. And if you keep this up, you will be wearing these on your dick! Do you understand? Jesus. Perhaps I’m being too hard on the senator. Although, I am not.

Later, Stewart asked Murphy, “Clearly, a decision was made within the Senate. Was there a meeting? Was there a lunch where all the senators in the Democratic caucus had, I’m going to assume, mostly mushy food.”

After Murphy quipped that they do serve Jell-O, Stewart continued, “I’ve been to the Senate. There is a chewing and indigestion issue. Was there a discussion as to whether or not you would invoke the filibuster, not give them cloture, and how did that discussion go?”

 

 

Murphy then went on quite a diatribe, “I mean, as you described, what is happening right now is the billionaire takeover of our government, the highest level of corruption that we have ever seen coming out of the White House, and, by the way, added to it, the destruction of our democracy because they know they can’t get away with it if we can hold them accountable.”

He continued:

And so this moment requires us to break norms. This moment requires us to take risks. And I get it. A lot of my colleagues said, shutting down the government, being in a government shutdown, that’s a risk, that has power to Donald Trump and Elon Musk, but how on Earth are we going to ask the American people to take risks for us, right, when there’s a five alarm constitutional fire, and we need them to be out on the streets? Not with hundreds—thousands or tens of thousands of people but hundreds of thousands of people if we’re not willing to show courage and take risks ourselves.

Alternatively, you could have a level head, and claim the sky is falling over cutting $13 billion from non-defense discretionary spending.

Comedy Central The Daily Show

3/17/2025

11:06 PM ET

JON STEWART: But — but you had said it was terrible, and… Oh, wait a minute… Oh, shit, I know what’s going on here. All right, I know what’s going on here. You got me going, Chucky. You probably got a little something out of this, didn’t you. Ole C-Schoo, you wouldn’t have given up that powerful leverage on the budget for nothing! My guess is, Chucky got some cheese.

ALICIA MENENDEZ: Did Schumer get anything from Republicans in exchange for those Dem votes?

SAHIL KAPUR: He did not.

STEWART: Senator Schumer, no disrespect, but you are a disgrace to Jewish stereotypes about financial negotiations.  That is just, I thought the whole point of us is that is what we do! But you are out there, “How much is it?” “$5.” “How about I give you $7!” Like, what are you doing? And for those of you who may have felt it was a total capitulation, Senator Schumer just felt like this wasn’t the moment for Democrats to press their case, because Trump is still too strong.

…

STEWART: You’re at 27 percent! You’ve got to get Trump to lose eight points of popularity just for you to get to the point where you’re 13 points below him! Your approval is only seven points above where it turns red and goes into low power mode. 

Maybe you’re not a numbers learner. Maybe a visual demonstration of where you’re at. Let me meet you where you [bleep] live! All right. Here we go! Let me do this! This is 48 percent approval! This is them! This is you. This is you. 27 percent! This is them! “Oh, I see, they are much higher.” 

Yes, they are much higher. And if you keep this up, you will be wearing these on your dick! Do you understand? Jesus. 

Perhaps I’m being too hard on the senator. Although, I am not.

…

STEWART: What is happening? So just in this CR for the budget—

CHRIS MURPHY: Yeah.

STEWART: — there was great resolve and unity about what a disaster this was for the American people. Chuck Schumer, they need us, they don’t have us, they don’t get to pass it. And then he just flips and I don’t want to blame it on him. Clearly, a decision was made within the Senate. Was there a meeting? Was there a lunch where all the senators in the Democratic caucus had, I’m going to assume, mostly mushy food.

MURPHY: There is Jell-O served at every single one of our lunches.

STEWART: I’ve been to the Senate. There is a chewing and indigestion issue. Was there a discussion as to whether or not you would invoke the filibuster, not give them cloture, and how did that discussion go?

MURPHY: Yeah, there was a discussion and there was a disagreement. 

STEWART: I see.

MURPHY: Listen, I don’t agree with the decision a handful of my colleagues made and this all to me sits in context, right? I mean, as you described, what is happening right now is the billionaire takeover of our government, the highest level of corruption that we have ever seen coming out of the White House, and, by the way, added to it, the destruction of our democracy because they know they can’t get away with it if we can hold them accountable. 

And so this moment requires us to break norms. This moment requires us to take risks. And I get it. A lot of my colleagues said, shutting down the government, being in a government shutdown, that’s a risk, that has power to Donald Trump and Elon Musk, but how on Earth are we going to ask the American people to take risks for us, right, when there’s a five alarm constitutional fire, and we need them to be out on the streets? Not with hundreds — thousands or tens of thousands of people but hundreds of thousands of people if we’re not willing to show courage and take risks ourselves.

The networks spent the better part of last week advocating on behalf of Mahmoud Khalil, the Columbia student agitator being processed for denaturalization and deportation due to his activities in material support of Hamas. However, ABC and CBS decided to bite their tongues, completely omitting their story from their evening newscasts.

NBC, though, found a bit of time for the story- albeit tucked into their story on deportations of suspected gangbangers and subsequent detention in a Salvadoran supermax:

KELLY O’DONNELL: In a separate deportation case, a Brown University professor of medicine with a valid visa was detained, then sent back to Lebanon. The Department of Homeland Security posted, that Rasha Alawieh had admitted she attended a funeral for the leader of Hezbollah, considered a terrorist organization by the U.S., and said she supported him. Her removal called “common sense security.” Her attorney could not be reached. 

That’s a hair over 25 seconds, in total. 25 seconds does not afford a whole lot of time to get the full story out. Its burial within another story, as opposed to covering it as a standalone item, screams “pro forma”. Here’s how The New York Post reported the story:

The Trump administration deported a Lebanese doctor who was an assistant professor at Brown University’s medical school after she addmitted that she attended a funeral for slain Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah, officials said. 

Dr. Rasha Alawieh, 34, was arrested after arriving at Boston’s Logan International Airport from Lebanon on Thursday. Her family claimed that officials provided no reason for her deportation, and they argued her rights were being violated because she had an active visa to live and work in the US.

The DOJ has since alleged that the Providence, Rhode Island, resident and visa holder has an affinity for the Hezbollah terrorist group, with Alawieh allegedly admitting that she attended the Nasrallah funeral last month while visiting family in Lebanon. 

Per other reporting, a search of Alawieh’s phone allegedly turned up images supportive of both Nasrallah and Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. In the aggregate, a lot more than made it into NBC’s item. However, NBC’s 25 seconds was 25 seconds more than did ABC and CBS.

It turns out that some aliens are deportable due to the views they hold, if those views are not aligned with U.S. interests. After advocating for Khalil, ABC and CBS could not bring themselves to admit this- choosing instead to suppress a counternarrative story. Credit to NBC News for having both a shred of integrity and 25 seconds.

Click “expand” to view the full transcript of the aforementioned report as aired on the NBC Nightly News on Monday, March 17th, 2025:

NBC NIGHTLY NEWS

3/17/25

6:31 PM

LESTER HOLT: Good evening and welcome. The Trump administration’s widening crackdown on illegal immigration taking on new dimensions tonight, including challenging the authority of courts to dictate such matters and arming the president with new tools. In Washington this afternoon, a hearing concerning the administration’s decision over the weekend to use the Enemy Aliens Act to deport from the U.S. hundreds of individuals said to be affiliated with Venezuelan and El Salvadoran gangs without due process. Today’s hearing to determine whether the government violated a court’s directive to order deportation flights to return to the U.S., those flights instead flown to El Salvador. The White House saying they paid $6 million to detain them there. President Trump saying the gang’s presence in the U.S. amounts to an invasion. It’s the latest flashpoint over the president’s aggressive moves to carry out mass and targeted deportations. Kelly O’Donnell has details.

KELLY O’DONNELL: Tonight, a federal court seeking answers from the Trump administration as The White House mounts a vigorous defense of its mass deportation of undocumented migrants it says were charged with violent crimes, pushing back against a federal judge.

STEPHEN MILLER: I would think without question, the most unlawful order that any district court judge has issued in our lifetimes.

O’DONNELL: Posting a cinematic, music-backed video of the operation, The White House touted the removal Saturday night of nearly 300 migrants. Officials said investigators determined these are violent members of Tren de Aragua and MS-13 gangs, classified as foreign terrorists. The White House said the U.S. government paid El Salvador $6 million to detain the deportees.

TOM HOMAN: We’re not stopping. I don’t care what the judges think, I don’t care what the left thinks, we’re coming.

O’DONNELL: At issue, whether the Trump administration complied with a federal judge’s order to temporarily delay deportations, including whether any flights took off after the order was issued. The White House says it complied.

KAROLINE LEAVITT: All of the planes that were subject to the written order, the judge’s written order, took off before the order was entered.

O’DONNELL: President Trump invoked a 1798 law, the Alien Enemies Act, which does not require due process in wartime. However, the U.S. is not at war with Venezuela or El Salvador. Mr. Trump defended his approach.

TRUMP: That’s an invasion. They invaded our country. So this is an- in that sense, this is war.

O’DONNELL: In a separate deportation case, a Brown University professor of medicine with a valid visa was detained, then sent back to Lebanon. The Department of Homeland Security posted, that Rasha Alawieh had admitted she attended a funeral for the leader of Hezbollah, considered a terrorist organization by the U.S., and said she supported him. Her removal called “common sense security.” Her attorney could not be reached. These actions come as new NBC News polling shows 44% say the country is on the right track, the highest number in 20 years. So 54% find the U.S. headed in the wrong direction. The president’s 47% approval rating is his highest across both terms while a majority, 45%, disapprove.

HOLT: And Kelly, we mentioned at the top of the broadcast that court hearing was under way, it has just ended and I understand the judge had some pretty tough words for the Trump administration.

O’DONNELL: That’s right Lester, the administration said it could not answer when deportation flights happened, which would have affected compliance, claiming they could not answer due to national security. The judge called that “one heck of a stretch,” and said his authority was valid even if the planes were outside of U.S. airspace. Lester.

HOLT: All right. Kelly, thanks.

 

With the markets rebounding and egg prices cratering, the networks were deprived an opportunity to foist their recession porn upon their viewers. They had no trouble settling on a new consensus top story, though, given their hysterical coverage of the Trump administration’s decision over the weekend to deport suspected Tren de Aragua and other gangbangers to a Salvadoran supermax.

CBS’s coverage was the most unhinged of all, what with its forced tie-in to St. Patrick’s Day: a pretentious stunt that served no other purpose than to remind viewers of how much they may miss Norah O’Donnell:

CBS EVENING NEWS

3/17/25

6:30 PM

JOHN DICKERSON: On this St. Patrick’s Day, as millions of Americans celebrate their Irish heritage, recent events remind us that the Irish were among the first immigrants to be targeted in deportation crackdowns. 

MAURICE DuBOIS: In the mid-1800s, New York and Massachusetts enforced policies to have Irish immigrants rounded up and deported.

DICKERSON: The American Civil Liberties Union didn’t exist then but if it had, it may have taken the legal position it is taking now, suing the Trump administration to stop what it considers to be the illegal deportation over the weekend of more than 200 migrants to El Salvador.

DuBOIS: The big difference now, the administration says many of those flown to Central America are considered by the government to be terrorists. 

DICKERSON: The administration cited a rarely-used 18th century law to justify the deportations. Senior White House Correspondent Ed O’Keefe is following the story. Good evening, Ed.

ED O’KEEFE: Good evening, John, The White House is strongly defending its decision to fly alleged gang members out of the country by using presidential war powers dating back to Thomas Jefferson. The U.S. isn’t at war with anyone right now but the president is picking a legal flight. 

After pretending to know what the ACLU may have done in the 1800s, Dickerson to O’Keefe but not before planting a narrative seed: that the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 is an old statute. O’Keefe would then go on to say that the law was last used by FDR when he was placing Japanese-Americans, not just immigrants, in internment camps. The idea, of course, is to suggest that deporting suspected violent criminals who had no right to enter into the United States is morally equivalent. Rather than getting soundbite from the ACLU, O’Keefe then turns to the Cato Institute for libertarian bolstering. 

Over at ABC, Rachel Scott read the memo and made the same arguments against the “Aliens Enemies Act”: that the law is “obscure” and used against Japanese-Americans. ABC’s focus was more centered on ginning up outrage over the lack of compliance with Judge Boasberg’s wild ruling ordering the deportation flights to return from international airspace, and on The White House’s arguments against. ABC’s report ended with a mention of Hunter and Ashley Biden losing their respective Secret Service details.

At NBC, a divergent approach. The report covered familiar ground but did so without trying to link these deportations to Japanese internment camps. Additionally, Kelly O’Donnell mentioned the deported Hezbollah doctor and the NBC poll showing President Trump with a 47% approval rating, and the 20-year high 44% “right track” rating.

The media’s coverage of the deportation flights effectively place them as advocates for the country retaining violent illegal immigrant gangbangers. Proving, again, their disconnect with the public they claim to serve.

Click “expand” to view the full transcripts of the aforementioned reports as aired on their respective evening newscasts on Monday, March 18th, 2025:

ABC WORLD NEWS TONIGHT

3/17/25

6:38 PM

DAVID MUIR: Now, to the developing headline at this hour. A hearing just a short time ago, a federal judge demanding the Trump administration explain why it defied the judge’s order, deporting hundreds. The judge had ordered two planes already in the air to turn around. The planes landing in El Salvador anyway. The president’s border czar tonight, saying: “I don’t care what the judges think.” Here’s ABC’s Senior Political Correspondent Rachel Scott tonight.

RACHEL SCOTT: Tonight, questions over whether the Trump administration brazenly violated an order from a federal judge, after he told them not to deport 261 Venezuelan immigrants to El Salvador, but they did it anyway. The administration claims the men are members of criminal gangs, invoking an obscure law: The Aliens Enemies Act of 1798, which allows the government to deport people with little to no due process, and was last used to round up Japanese-Americans during World War II. And in an emergency court hearing on Saturday, federal Judge James Boasberg asked for more information and put the deportations on pause, saying, “Any plane containing these folks that is going to take off or is in the air needs to be returned to the United States. This is something that you need to make sure is complied with immediately.” But by then, two planes were already in the air, and they did not turn around. Administration officials claiming those planes had already crossed into international waters. The president of El Salvador, a Trump ally, posting on X, “Oopsie, too late.” On Air Force One, President Trump asked if his administration violated the judge’s orders.

DONALD Trump: I don’t know yet. We’ll speak to the lawyers about that.

REPORTER: Are you planning any more deportation…

Trump: I can tell you this, these were bad people. That was a bad group of — as I say, hombres.

SCOTT: Today the president’s border czar saying,quote: “I don’t care what the judges think.” 

TOM HOMAN: We’re not stopping, I don’t care what the judges think, I don’t care what the left thinks, we’re coming.

SCOTT: The White House press secretary raising questions about whether the judge’s orders carry weight, because it was delivered from the bench and not put in writing.

KAROLINE LEAVITT: There’s actually questions about whether a verbal order carries the same weight as a legal order- as a written order.

SCOTT: But when I asked the architect of the president’s immigration policy, Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, whether they would comply with a verbal order from the judge, he questioned whether judges had the authority to rule over the president’s policies at all.

SCOTT: Is it the administration’s understanding that you would comply with a verbal order?

STEPHEN MILLER: No district court judge, who- who presides over just some small, like, little geography of the whole country, could possibly presume to have the authority to direct the expulsion of terrorists from our soil, who, by the way, are also here illegally. Thank you, everybody.

SCOTT: And David, the administration was back in court tonight in front of that same judge, he demanded to know why the administration defied his order. When they tried to make the distinction between that verbal order and the written order, the judge calling that a quote, “a heck of a stretch.” And there’s breaking news here from The White House. Just moments ago, President Trump announced that he is ending Secret Service protection for former President Joe Biden’s two adult children, Hunter and Ashley Biden. David, it is not unusual for the adult children of former presidents to receive Secret Service protection for several months after presidents leave office, David. 

MUIR: Rachel Scott, live at The White House tonight. Rachel, thank you.

CBS EVENING NEWS

3/17/25

6:30 PM

JOHN DICKERSON: On this St. Patrick’s Day, as millions of Americans celebrate their Irish heritage, recent events remind us that the Irish were among the first immigrants to be targeted in deportation crackdowns. 

MAURICE DuBOIS: In the mid-1800s, New York and Massachusetts enforced policies to have Irish immigrants rounded up and deported.

DICKERSON: The American Civil Liberties Union didn’t exist then but if it had, it may have taken the legal position it is taking now, suing the Trump administration to stop what it considers to be the illegal deportation over the weekend of more than 200 migrants to El Salvador.

DuBOIS: The big difference now, the administration says many of those flown to Central America are considered by the government to be terrorists. 

DICKERSON: The administration cited a rarely-used 18th century law to justify the deportations. Senior White House Correspondent Ed O’Keefe is following the story. Good evening, Ed.

ED O’KEEFE: Good evening, John, The White House is strongly defending its decision to fly alleged gang members out of the country by using presidential war powers dating back to Thomas Jefferson. The U.S. isn’t at war with anyone right now but the president is picking a legal flight. 

This deportation flight landed early Sunday in El Salvador. The cameras were ready. Footage slickly produced by the Salvadoran government shows they were whisked away to one of the most notorious prisons in the world. CBS News visited last month, finding 80-100 crammed into a cell. Officially it can hold up to 40,000 prisoners, but at the time was only half full. The Trump administration has vowed to help fill it, paying El Salvador $6 million to take three plane loads on Sunday.

DONALD Trump: These are bad people.

O’KEEFE: Most were removed under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, last invoked by Franklin D. Roosevelt to detain Japanese immigrants in internment camps during World War II. Today, The White House stood by the president’s moves.

So you’re saying definitively, you can- that the administration can prove everyone that was put on those flights to El Salvador was either a member of Tren de Aragua, MS-13 or some other entity?

KAROLINE LEAVITT: Yeah, we’ve already provided the breakdown, in the effort of transparency, about the 261 illegal aliens who were deported.

O’KEEFE: The White House says most were members of Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang. Others, from the transnational MS-13 gang, including two ringleaders. 

What criteria other than, say, tattoos, or maybe being in the wrong place at the wrong time, are they using to determine that someone is actually a member of one of these organizations?

LEAVITT: Intelligence and the men and women on the ground in the interior of our country, who are finally being allowed to do their jobs.

O’KEEFE: The president’s use of the law sparked a weekend legal fight where minutes mattered. After The White House revealed that it invoked the Act on Saturday, the planes took off. Shortly after, a judge ordered the planes to turn around, but they never did, and a third flight would depart a few minutes later. David Bier tracks immigration policy for the libertarian Cato Institute. 

Why should any American care about these flights that went, and the way those people were sent away?

DAVID BIER: We have no idea whether these people were in the country legally or illegally, whether they were in a gang or not.

O’KEEFE: The bigger part of this, perhaps, is that it’s part of the ongoing fight over what exactly an American president can do. Is that fair?

BIER: Once we get to the point in the country where the president gets to say “I can arrest anyone, I don’t have to prove anything, I don’t have to go to courts, I don’t have to follow the laws as they are written,” then that’s anarchy.

DuBOIS: So, Ed, how much does The White House want this to be a public fight?

O’KEEFE: Oh, President Trump’s been talking about using this law ever since he launched his second White House campaign, so it’s no surprise to his supporters. But this is exactly the political legal fight they want. First of all, polling continues to show a majority of Americans support what he’s doing on immigration, they believe this sustains that. And legally, they believe ultimately a conservative Supreme Court is going to rule in their favor.

DICKERSON: And…what does the judge say at this point about this, Ed?

O’KEEFE: So there was a hearing today, there’s going to be another one on Friday. He’s asking the administration for more details about who exactly was on those three flights, why were they sent without following his orders, and how many more people might be still in the United States that could conceivably be sent to El Salvador, or at least deported by using the Alien Enemies Act. He admonished them for ignoring his rulings on Saturday night. The ACLU, which is suing in this case, says they are going to ask the judge to order flights to bring back those immigrants, believing that El Salvador is basically working as a private prison on behalf of the United States. Guys.

DICKERSON: Ed O’Keefe for us at The White House. Thank you, Ed.

NBC NIGHTLY NEWS

3/17/25

6:31 PM

LESTER HOLT: Good evening and welcome. The Trump administration’s widening crackdown on illegal immigration taking on new dimensions tonight, including challenging the authority of courts to dictate such matters and arming the president with new tools. In Washington this afternoon, a hearing concerning the administration’s decision over the weekend to use the Enemy Aliens Act to deport from the U.S. hundreds of individuals said to be affiliated with Venezuelan and El Salvadoran gangs without due process. Today’s hearing to determine whether the government violated a court’s directive to order deportation flights to return to the U.S., those flights instead flown to El Salvador. The White House saying they paid $6 million to detain them there. President Trump saying the gang’s presence in the U.S. amounts to an invasion. It’s the latest flashpoint over the president’s aggressive moves to carry out mass and targeted deportations. Kelly O’Donnell has details.

KELLY O’DONNELL: Tonight, a federal court seeking answers from the Trump administration as The White House mounts a vigorous defense of its mass deportation of undocumented migrants it says were charged with violent crimes, pushing back against a federal judge.

STEPHEN MILLER: I would think without question, the most unlawful order that any district court judge has issued in our lifetimes.

O’DONNELL: Posting a cinematic, music-backed video of the operation, The White House touted the removal Saturday night of nearly 300 migrants. Officials said investigators determined these are violent members of Tren de Aragua and MS-13 gangs, classified as foreign terrorists. The White House said the U.S. government paid El Salvador $6 million to detain the deportees.

TOM HOMAN: We’re not stopping. I don’t care what the judges think, I don’t care what the left thinks, we’re coming.

O’DONNELL: At issue, whether the Trump administration complied with a federal judge’s order to temporarily delay deportations, including whether any flights took off after the order was issued. The White House says it complied.

KAROLINE LEAVITT: All of the planes that were subject to the written order, the judge’s written order, took off before the order was entered.

O’DONNELL: President Trump invoked a 1798 law, the Alien Enemies Act, which does not require due process in wartime. However, the U.S. is not at war with Venezuela or El Salvador. Mr. Trump defended his approach.

TRUMP: That’s an invasion. They invaded our country. So this is an- in that sense, this is war.

O’DONNELL: In a separate deportation case, a Brown University professor of medicine with a valid visa was detained, then sent back to Lebanon. The Department of Homeland Security posted, that Rasha Alawieh had admitted she attended a funeral for the leader of Hezbollah, considered a terrorist organization by the U.S., and said she supported him. Her removal called “common sense security.” Her attorney could not be reached. These actions come as new NBC News polling shows 44% say the country is on the right track, the highest number in 20 years. So 54% find the U.S. headed in the wrong direction. The president’s 47% approval rating is his highest across both terms while a majority, 45%, disapprove.

HOLT: And Kelly, we mentioned at the top of the broadcast that court hearing was under way, it has just ended and I understand the judge had some pretty tough words for the Trump administration.

O’DONNELL: That’s right Lester, the administration said it could not answer when deportation flights happened, which would have affected compliance, claiming they could not answer due to national security. The judge called that “one heck of a stretch,” and said his authority was valid even if the planes were outside of U.S. airspace. Lester.

HOLT: All right. Kelly, thanks.

 

Why are the media so hostile to Israel and so sympathetic to pro-Hamas activists? Why should America stick with Israel as an ally in global geopolitics? MRC Business editor Joseph Vazquez and I asked Josh Hammer, author of the new book Israel and Civilization: The Fate of the Jewish Nation and the Destiny of the West. On his Fox show, Mark Levin called the new book a “tour de force.”

We begin with pro-Hamas protest leader Mahmoud Khalil, as the media pretend he’s not a radical Islamist who supports killing all the Jews, starting with Israel. Hammer wrote a column lamenting “the media’s incessant focus on the Khalil saga” underlines why they’ve lost trust with the public. Margaret Brennan suggested there wasn’t any evidence linking Khalil to radical causes like, say, being devoted to the end of Western civilization — which Khalil’s group, Columbia University Apartheid Divest (CUAD), openly advocated. It’s no wonder that Secretary of State Marco Rubio suggested she should watch the news.

In the land of DEI and CRT, the Left has applied its oppressor/oppressed lens to Israel (the white oppressor) and the Palestinians (the brown oppressed). This ignores the fact that Israel’s Jewish population is not majority-Ashkenazi (European). Hammer jokes that Israeli Jews aren’t all Jerry Seinfeld and Larry David, but a diverse array of ethnicities, including Arab and Ethiopian.

Hammer argues the future prosperity and ultimate fate of Western civilization is dependent upon the security and thriving of the Jewish people and the Jewish State of Israel. If Western civilization begins in the Bible, than the people of the Bible are its natural guardians.

Enjoy the podcast below, or wherever you listen to podcasts. 

During his appearance on Club Random With Bill Maher Sunday night, Don Lemon expressed the bind-boggling opinion that, following their defeat in the past election, what the Democratic Party needed by way of a little rejuvenation was Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY). Lemon claimed that people “love AOC,” and even went so far as to claim she would be a hit for the same reasons as President Trump. Eventually, Maher stepped in and brought him down to earth a bit.

After a lengthy and non-G-rated conversation on various subjects, Lemon offered his view on the Democratic leadership vacuum:

I love Nancy Pelosi… But I think that era of the Nancy Pelosi type… is over. I think that this is the era of… [a]nd I’m… not necessarily in love with their policies, but people love AOC… And I think that the Democratic Party should put the people out there who the people want… who they’re asking for, who are meeting the moment with the same energy that-

Maher interrupted to sour Lemon’s optimism about AOC’s prospects as the Democratic Party’s leader:

MAHER: They’re not asking for AOC.

LEMON: Yes, they are.

MAHER: The people you party with are.

LEMON: No, no, no. The people I party with don’t like AOC.

MAHER: Oh, please

LEMON: No, they don’t.  At all.

MAHER: Well, most people don’t.

LEMON: But AOC-

MAHER: Because she’s very far-left-

Lemon stuck to his story, though, and even asserted, “people will vote for AOC and Donald Trump on the same ticket. Because they’re authentic.” To that, Maher just laughed outright. “No,” Lemon persisted, “because they’re authentic.”

 

 

Maher then voiced his thoughts on just how “authentic” AOC’s whole persona actually was, saying that “being a gorgeous woman who I wouldn’t even know was Hispanic, in a city that… has a million Hispanics… and does not treat them badly,” did not mean that “in some way she’s behind the eight-ball… it’s just not true.”

When Lemon vaguely responded that he still didn’t “think she’s as privileged as many people who are in Congress right now,” Maher questioned what that was even supposed to mean, saying “She was a bartender… [S]o, I was a delivery boy.” 

Rather than dropping it, Lemon then went so far as to call the extreme-left Congresswoman a “Democratic icon,” to which Maher sneered, “Well, she’s the wrong- if you think that’s the direction that the country should- the Democratic Party.”

Lemon cut in, and claimed he was not talking about her actual policies, but insisted that the loudest voice had to be given to “the people who are out front speaking for the party,” which, apparently in his mind meant her. 

If in fact Lemon was right in his assessment that such a left-wing fringe figure, and one with such a track record just of saying patently ridiculous things, would be ideal as a new leader for one of America’s major political parties, that would have been a very alarming reality for a great many people. 

Maher, though, was eventually satisfied with Lemon’s insistence that she’s “evolving” and “understands the game a little bit more,” than she used to, and even, incredible as it may have sounded, “is very, very smart.”

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

Club Random With Bill Maher
03/16/2025
10:39 PM

(…)

DON LEMON: I love Nancy Pelosi. I think she’s a very smart woman. But I think that era of the Nancy Pelosi type in the Democratic Party is over. 

I think that this is the era of, whether- and I- I didn’t like her policies at first. And I’m not- not necessarily in love with their policies, but people love AOC. People love Jasmine Crockett. People love Eric Swalwell, and the like.

And I think that the Democratic Party should put the people out there who the people want. They should put the- the politicians out there who the people want, who they’re asking for, who are meeting the moment with the same energy that-

BILL MAHER: They’re not asking for AOC.

LEMON: Yes, they are.

MAHER: The people you party with are. 

LEMON: No, no, no. The people I party with don’t like AOC.

MAHER: Oh, please.

LEMON: No, they don’t.  At all. 

MAHER: Well, most people don’t.

LEMON: But AOC-

MAHER: Because she’s very far-left-

LEMON: But let me tell you why I’m saying that: Because AOC- the same- because people will vote for AOC and Donald Trump on the same ticket. Because they’re authentic.

MAHER: [LAUGHS]

LEMON: No, because they’re authentic.

MAHER: I don’t think- I- that- Don- 

LEMON: I think you’re wrong about that. 

MAHER: What people like about people like Trump and Federman is they’re-

LEMON: What about that’s phony?

MAHER: Because it’s irrelevant to her life-

LEMON: But you don’t know her life-

MAHER: I know that being a gorgeous woman who I wouldn’t even know was Hispanic, in a city that’s largely- has a million Hispanics- and is- and does not treat them badly, doesn’t mean-

LEMON: But that doesn’t mean she doesn’t struggle- that doesn’t mean that she was set down in a-

MAHER: It kind of- it implies it.

LEMON: But that doesn’t mean that she was set down in [sic] Hispanic ghetto in the Bronx and, and had to deal with that growing up, and that she comes from a working class family-

MAHER: It implies that for some- it implies that in some way she’s behind the eight-ball, because of that, and it’s just not true. And so, I don’t-

LEMON: I don’t know if she’s behind the eight-ball, but I don’t think she’s as privileged as many people who are in Congress right now-

MAHER: Am I privileged, or not? She was a bartender-

LEMON: Yeah-

MAHER: -You know, so, I was a delivery boy.

LEMON: So look, I don’t agree with her policies, but I’m saying, sometimes- like- I just- Bill, like you don’t agree with Donald Trump’s policies?

MAHER: No, most of them-

LEMON: But that’s what the people want. 

MAHER: Some of them. 

LEMON: Whether you like her or not- I don’t like what she did with Amazon in New York- but I think AOC is an- she’s a democratic icon.

MAHER: Well, she’s the wrong-  if you think that’s the direction that the country should- the Democratic party-

LEMON: I’m not saying the policies that she espouses, that’s [sic] the direction, but I’m saying that you have to give the people who are- the people who are out front speaking for the party, not the people who are-

MAHER: If you think-

LEMON: She’s evolving?

MAHER: Yeah, she’s evolving-

LEMON: And she’s-

MAHER: -as we all are

LEMON: -And she is moving into-

MAHER: Right.

LEMON: She understands the game a little bit more and if you notice, she is sort of, becoming a sort of, normal kind of Democrat in many ways. 

MAHER: Yeah, that’s great-

LEMON: I think that’s a very smart tactic. She’s very smart.

MAHER: Let’s get behind that.

(…)

During a briefing Monday afternoon otherwise dominated by probing questions about the weekend deportation flights of dangerous illegal immigrants who belong to the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua (TdA), White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt took a moment to zing the French after a French member of the European Parliament demanded the U.S. return the Statue of Liberty.

Fox’s Peter Doocy had cued her up: “There is now a member of the European Parliament from France who does not think the U.S. represents the values of the statue of Liberty anymore. They want the statue of Liberty back. So, is President Trump going to send the Statue of Liberty back to France?”

Leavitt fired back at MEP member Raphaël Glucksmann of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats: “Absolutely not. And my advice to that unnamed, low-level French politician would be to remind them that it’s only because of the United States of America that the French are not speaking German right now, so they should be very grateful to our great country.”

 

 

At least Doocy didn’t lecture Leavitt about the Statue of Liberty like then-CNN carnival barker Jim Acosta did to Stephen Miller in August 2017.

Moments earlier, Doocy Time commenced with this substantive question even Leavitt said was “a very good question” that “the courts and people on the left” should explain: “If you guys can’t send 200 Tren de Aragua terrorists at a time to El Salvador, where you going to send them instead?”

“And if these guys are terrorists at war with the United States, is President Trump considering anything more lethal to address them than just sticking them on a plane somewhere,” Doocy also wondered, to which Leavitt said “sounded like…curiosity in the premise of your question” and thus expounded on how TdA is “a foreign terrorist organization” with a heinous track record “if you want to have that argument.”

The only reporter prior to Doocy was the “new media seat” recipient, which went to NewsNation and one of their White House correspondents, Kellie Meyer.

She cut to the chase with a simple question outlining the opposition to the deportation flights with Leavitt defly explaining the stakes of not removing dangerous illegal aliens:

Meyer followed up with another question from the left: “Does the President, you know, does this allow him to defy the court order without having this — the checks and balances and the separation of power?”

Leavitt calmly hit back that they don’t have concerns since “this administration acted within the confines of the law” and “are quite confident in that and we are wholly confident we’re are going to win this case in court.”

Following Doocy, NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell picked up on Meyer’s line of questioning:

CBS’s Ed O’Keefe went in a slightly different direction with an entirely fair question about specifics on those deported:

In a follow-up, O’Keefe wondered whether there was any “criteria” used “other than, say, tattoos, or maybe being in the wrong place at the wrong time” to determine gang membership. Leavitt replied the administration relied on the “[i]ntelligence and the men and women on the ground in the interior of our country who are finally being allowed to do their jobs” with more details to come as the court challenges proceed.

Immediately after 2023 MRC Bulldog Award winner Mary Margaret Olohan of the Daily Wire took notice of a White House video on deportations being set to Semisonic’s Closing Time, Elizabeth Mitchell with our friends at the Daily Signal had a policy question each on Russia and the revamp Customs and Border Patrol app for illegal aliens:

Fox Business’s Edward Lawrence continued to show his tough lines of questioning about the economy wasn’t changing simply because a Republican administration was now in office:

Elsewhere, Las Vegas Review Journal columnist Debra Saunders had a thought-provoking question about run rights and then Daily Caller’s Reagan Reese wondered when President Trump will get moving on filling over three dozen vacancies on the federal judiciary:

The Washington Post’s Cat Zakrzewski closed out the briefing by reasking one of O’Keefe’s queries: “I wanted to ask if you would release more granular data about the people who were sent to El Salvador this week, particularly will you be releasing their names?”

Leavitt wrapped with a Kayleigh McEnany-esque closing statement on this (click “expand”)

I don’t believe so because of the privacy concerns at this point in time. That does not mean we will not eventually. I would refer you to the Department of Homeland Security for more details on the individuals on the flight. But we have been incredibly transparent and giving you the breakdown of the numbers and also some of the crimes committed by these heinous criminals and individuals. Kidnapping, sexual abuse of a child, robbery, aggravated assault on a police officer. I would remind everybody in this room that Tren de Aragua is a foreign terrorist organization operating within the United States of America because the previous administration allowed them to invade our country. These are monsters who tortured, raped, and murdered a 12-year-old Jocelyn Nungaray. They murdered 22-year-old nursing student Laken Riley. They led a multi-sex — state sex trafficking operation involving smuggling women into the United States, holding them in stash houses in Louisiana, Florida, New Jersey, Texas, and Virginia and forcing them into prostitution and they kidnapped and murdered a 33-year-old woman in Texas. They sexually and physically assaulted a woman and her daughter in Wisconsin. They conducted a mass shooting in Illinois. They peddled untraceable ghost guns across New York City. Took over an Aurora, Colorado apartment complex where they kidnapped and tortured victims and, by the way, many of you in the mainstream media said that didn’t happen. It turned out that it did and because of the effective immigration policies of this administration, those foreign terrorists were detained and they are no longer operating on American soil and we have President Trump to thank for that.

To see the relevant transcript from the March 17 briefing (including even more questions), click here.

On Monday, the “Big Three” networks of ABC, CBS, and NBC used their flagship morning news shows to side with dangerous illegal immigrants and Tren de Aragua members over the well-being of American citizens, denouncing their “controversial deportations” to a notorious jail in El Salvador and comparing President Trump’s decision to the internment of Japanese-Americans in World War II.

In essence, the liberal media despicably chose to compare illegal immigrants to American citizens who were rounded up and placed in camps simply for having Japanese ancestry, one of the ugliest stains on our country’s history.

“Trump administration ignores a federal judge’s directive sending hundreds of alleged Venezuelan gang members to a prison in El Salvador with no due process, invoking a centuries-old wartime law to deport them,” ABC’s Good Morning America co-host and former Clinton official George Stephanopoulos complained.

Later, he claimed to viewers that “[a] constitutional clash is likely looming” and was followed by chief White House correspondent Mary Bruce declaring there to be “a real showdown between this administration and the judicial branch.”

 

 

Bruce further lamented: “[T]his morning, hundreds of alleged Venezuelan gang members are waking up in prison in El Salvador after the Trump administration rapidly deported them, ignoring a federal judge’s directive.”

She then made the Japanese-Americans comparison: “Trump over the weekend invoking the Alien Enemies Act, an obscure war time law from 1798, allowing the government to deport non-citizens with little or no due process. The law last used to play a role in the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II.”

“But after some non-citizens represented by the ACLU sued the administration, that federal judge in an emergency hearing Saturday ordered ‘any plane containing these folks that is going to take off or is in the air needs to be returned to the United States,’” she added.

Following a soundbite from an ACLU lawyer arguing this behavior calls into question whether America’s still “a constitutional republic,” Bruce also held up the deportation of “Brown University professor Dr. Rasha Alawieh, a kidney transplant specialist….despite having a valid visa and despite a court order[.]”

Bruce conveniently ignored a key finding that Alawieh said she was in Lebanon for the funeral of former Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah. 

Chief Washington correspondent and three-time anti-Trump author Jonathan Karl also took umbrage with the mass deportations as “rather extraordinary” behavior to make “a calculated decision to ignore the judge’s directive” with flights having taken off before a far-left judge could stop them.

“By the way, that is an act that’s only been used three times in all of American history, so the judge was clearly skeptical of it…[T]his has huge implications for the other court cases working their way through right now on other actions by this President,” he added.

Over on NBC’s Today, co-host Craig Melvin teased a “showdown” with “President Trump facing a new legal fight after losing a centuries old wartime act to deport hundreds of migrants.”

Senior White House correspondent Garrett Haake had the story and at least pointed out Trump campaigned on using the Alien Enemies Act before referring the “controversial” and “stunning” flights (click “expand”):

 

 

HAAKE: President Trump promised during the campaign and his inaugural address to wield a rarely used, more-than-200-year-old law to target foreign gangs operating on U.S. soil. This weekend, he made good on that threat in stunning fashion, despite an order from a federal judge, sparking a new legal and political backlash over immigration. Overnight, President Trump defending his administration’s controversial deportations of some 300 alleged Venezuelan gang members. Not back to their home country, but to a mega-prison in El Salvador.

TRUMP: These are bad people. That was a bad group of, as I say, hombres.

HAAKE: The president of El Salvador posting this video on X of the deportation flights arriving and prisoners taken into custody and having their heads shaved. The White House claiming authority for the deportations under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, a statute last invoked during World War II. A federal judge immediately blocked the President’s proclamation and ordered any planes to return to the U.S. immediately, but they did not. The White House quickly appealing the judge’s order, claiming in a statement Sunday that it had, “no lawful basis” and was issued after the planes had left U.S. territory. The President responding to critiques about using the wartime power.

TRUMP: This is a time of war. [SCREEN WIPE] They invaded our country. So this is — in that sense, this is war.

As for CBS Mornings, co-host Tony Dokoupil followed the others by saying the administration was “disregarding a judge’s ruling on deportations, claiming in this case the court has no authority in the matter.” In a post on X, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt addressed these descriptions as inaccurate.

Senior White House correspondent Weijia Jiang started with the fact that the Alien Enemies Act was “last used during World War II” and the White House has been “defiant” in having gone through with the flights.

 

 

“The Alien Enemies Act allows for quick arrests and deportations without many of the legal processes for immigration cases. Trump insists he has the power to use the act…The Justice Department said the group had already left U.S. territory when the judge made the ruling,” she added.

She also had two soundbites from an ACLU official defending these dangerous gang members as having been victims of a “lawless” federal government.

To see the relevant March 17 transcripts, click here (for ABC), here (for CBS), and here (for NBC).

The Trump administration’s deportation of several violent Venezuelan gang members who were in the country illegally made the liberal ladies of ABC News’s The View very upset, Monday morning. Co-host Sunny Hostin called it a “constitutional crisis” while Ana Navarro suggested it was an attack on the Venezuelan Americans who voted for President Trump (she also basked in their purported misery). But moderator Whoopi Goldberg took the most factually inaccurate stand when she erroneously claimed it was evidence that any American could find themselves deported by Trump.

As they were nearing the commercial break, Goldberg told the audience to “keep your eyes open” and suggested it was dangerous to be on the streets of America, “because if they can just come up and take somebody because they’ve made a decision that you’re supposed to be that person, any one of us could find ourselves being deported to some country we’ve never been.”

 

 

“Don’t give him any ideas, girl,” fake Republican Ana Navarro pleaded with Goldberg.

She went on to bizarrely whine and question why “you” have her personal information. It was unclear why the “you” was she was talking about since the federal government already had everyone’s information at it was nothing new under the Trump administration.

Goldberg and Hostin then teamed up to assert, without evidence, that Trump and Republicans were “taking” away the right to free speech:

GOLDBERG: Listen. It is very clear to me that if we don’t continue to say, we want — listen. I understand you want to clean out all the bad stuff. I get it, but why do you now have access to my personal information? I get what the things you’re trying to do. I don’t understand why you’re taking my stuff, my person — not mine personally, but each and every one of you.

HOSTIN: And your constitutional right to free speech.

GOLDBERG: And your constitutional rights of free speech. Which, you know, everybody says, you know, ‘You never let us say anything. We’re, you know, conservatives” [in a mocking voice].

“And, in fact, you’re doing the same thing you’re accusing everyone else of doing,” she chided Republicans and asserting that their speech had never been infringed, “and you’re doing it in a way we’ve never seen before because very few people have kept you from speaking out.”

Whoopi, just because you say the term “in fact” doesn’t mean what you’re claiming is true. Especially on The View where you guy make up wild conspiracy theories and push them via the ABC News brand.

Last year, Goldberg insanely claimed Republicans “want to bring slavery back.” She teamed up with First Lady Jill Biden to assert “we will lose all of our rights” if the GOP won the election. There was also the time Goldberg lost her mind and started screaming about Trump supposedly wanting to outlaw interracial marriage and redistributing the white spouse.

Clearly, ABC News wasn’t concerned about the conspiracy theories and lies Goldberg was pushing because none of that, including her claims on Monday, received a legal note to distance the “news outlet” from the claims.

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

ABC’s The View
March 17, 2024
11:21:18 a.m. Eastern

(…)

WHOOPI GOLDBERG: And – You just got to keep your eyes open, y’all, because if they can just come up and take somebody because they’ve made a decision that you’re supposed to be that person, any one of us could find ourselves being deported to some country we’ve never been.

ANA NAVARRO: Don’t give him any ideas, girl.

GOLDBERG: Listen. It is very clear to me that if we don’t continue to say, we want — listen. I understand you want to clean out all the bad stuff. I get it, but why do you now have access to my personal information? I get what the things you’re trying to do. I don’t understand why you’re taking my stuff, my person — not mine personally, but each and every one of you.

SUNNY HOSTIN: And your constitutional right to free speech.

GOLDBERG: And your constitutional rights of free speech. Which, you know, everybody says, you know, ‘You never let us say anything. We’re, you know, conservatives” [in a mocking voice]. And, in fact, you’re doing the same thing you’re accusing everyone else of doing, and you’re doing it in a way we’ve never seen before because very few people have kept you from speaking out. But this is where we are now.

Well, we’re right here now, and you see I’ve beat the music. I beat the music.

[Cheers and applause]

We’ll be right back.

In recent years, Washington Post columnist George Will has not been our favorite. I called him “Jennifer Rubin with shorter hair.” But he still pens a conservative column from time to time, clearly upsetting left-wing Post subscribers with a Sunday column suggesting the Corporation for Public Broadcasting is useless, and should be defunded.

CPB is like the human appendix: vestigial, purposeless and susceptible to unhealthy episodes. In 2025, it is a cultural redundancy whose remaining rationale is, amusingly, that government should subsidize its programing because so few want it. Commercial broadcasters cater to the vulgar multitude, so the refined few are left out, orphans with nothing to do but pout and reread Proust.

Government funding of CPB’s narrowcasting for its largely affluent constituency resembles agriculture subsidies for agribusiness. And as a critic has said — a defender of government-supported broadcasting — the “N” in NPR stands not for “National” but for “Niche.”

If Republicans mean a syllable of what they say about pruning federal functions, they will begin with the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. They will ask: If not here, where? And if not now, when?

Below that is a generated summary of comments launched below the piece: 

The comments overwhelmingly support the continued funding of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), arguing that NPR and PBS provide essential, high-quality, and unbiased programming that is not available elsewhere.

That’s false on at least two points: “public” broadcasting isn’t one bit unbiased, and it sounds a lot like TV networks elsewhere, like MSNBC or CNN. 

Will expanded on the notion that PBS and NPR make programming for liberal elites: 

The federal subsidy is about 15 percent of the funding for all public broadcasting. If the viewers, listeners and others who volunteer the other 85 percent enjoy the CPB’s offerings as much as they say, surely they will provide the other 15 percent. They should know that government’s share is a regressive transfer of wealth: The average American household income is less than that of the average income of PBS viewers and listeners to the CPB’s NPR.

According to Market Enginuity, an advertising firm, “If one were to combine the average statistics for PBS viewers on a national level, they would likely find a married homeowning woman who is in her 30s or 40s,” who “takes at least 3 vacations each year” and “holds a post-graduate degree.” PBS viewers are more likely than viewers of commercial television to be “highly educated, white-collar professionals.” And: “The PBS audience is 44 percent more likely to hold a doctorate degree.” Hence, says Market Enginuity, “the value of advertising on PBS.”

This is a little intriguing since one reason for the tonsorial Jennifer Rubin insult was that Will granted an interview to NPR in 2020 which surely delighted upscale liberal NPR listeners as he suggested the Republicans should be routed in the election.