INVESTIGATIONS

Just over a year ago, in April 2024, ABC News’s The View announced that they had “stopped asking” President Trump to be on the show and said they had banned election deniers. But what if the moderator of the show was an election denier? During Thursday’s opening segment, Whoopi Goldberg suggested that Trump had rigged the 2024 presidential election.

Bitter about Trump posting on social media bragging about investors predicting he would win the election, and trying to gaslight about the Biden economy, Goldberg scolded Trump and warned him to stop lest someone poke around and discover insider knowledge of his impending victory:

I want to remind people that he took credit for Biden’s economy – BOOMING economy, claiming investors knew he was going to win. I think he should stop saying that because you’re going to make somebody investigate how investigators would know you were going to win. I’m just putting that out there. You know.

What triggered Goldberg’s election denialism was a January 29, 2024 Truth Social from Trump where he bombastically declared in all caps: “THIS IS THE TRUMP STOCK MARKET BECAUSE MY POLL AGAINST BIDEN ARE SO GOOD THAT INVESTORS ARE PROJECTING THAT I WILL WIN…”

Goldberg asked the rest of the cast how long the American people were going to put up with Trump as president since “the economy was great when he came in.” Joy Behar agreed by writing off average Americans upset at inflation by arguing that all the “every important person in the economy said” Bidenomics were great.

 

 

Further in the segment, Goldberg suggested that Trump “came in with a good [economy]” from Obama during his first term; sentiment shared by an irritated Sunny Hostin, who asserted that Trump had twice “inherited” good economies and tried to falsely give credit to Biden for the post-COVID bounce back:

HOSTIN: I think that Whoopi’s point is very important. Trump inherited Obama’s economy. So, let’s never forget that! And then, he then inherited Biden’s economy. And I know we’re going to have the former president come and talk about his legacy, but I want to mention that his economic legacy historic wage gains, investment in job growth, marred by inflation, of course, but numbers don’t lie. His economy was strong, Trump’s tariffs killed it. The nation’s GDP growth under Biden was impressive; rose at a solid 3.1 percent rate at the end of his term.

BEHAR: Unemployment very low.

HOSTIN: I was going to say, he was the president to oversee monthly job gains for the entirety of his presidency.

“What good has [Trump] done to the economy?! What kind of businessman is that?! A bad one!” Hostin shouted.

Seemingly denying the fact that Trump won the popular vote in 2024, Goldberg suggested that Trump’s economic policies were revenge on the American people. “I think he’s angry at the country because I think he feels that Americans didn’t support him, he feels our allies didn’t support him, and now he’s getting even,” she  

“[T]here’s no other reason to do what he’s doing. It doesn’t make sense to me,” Goldberg proclaimed.

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

ABC’s The View
May 1, 2025
11:03:36 a.m. Eastern

(…)

WHOOPI GOLDBERG: I want to remind people that he took credit for Biden’s economy – BOOMING economy, claiming investors knew he was going to win. I think he should stop saying that because you’re going to make somebody investigate how investigators would know you were going to win. I’m just putting that out there. You know.

Now, how long are people going to put up with this because, you know, the economy was great when he came in?

SUNNY HOSTIN: Yeah.

SARA HAINES: Yeah.

JOY BEHAR: That’s what every important person in the economy said, yeah.

GOLDBERG: Everybody was saying, yes. So, I’m not sure. And I don’t know why suddenly now he said we’re going to have billions and billions and billions. You’re going to get billions and now he’s talking about no dolls on the shelf. I don’t know what to do.

(…)

11:06:13 a.m. Eastern

BEHAR: Alyssa, wasn’t that because he had people around who controlled him?

GOLDBERG: And he came in with a good – He came in from Obama’s economy.

[Crosstalk]

ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: He had sound economic policy and he had advisers who talked to him about the consequences about across-the-board tariffs. If you want to target some things in China, fine, but work with our European allies, work with our pacific allies. That’s actually how you out China and strengthen America.

BEHAR: Why doesn’t he do that?

[Applause]

HOSTIN: I think that Whoopi’s point is very important. Trump inherited Obama’s economy. So, let’s never forget that! And then, he then inherited Biden’s economy. And I know we’re going to have the former president come and talk about his legacy, but I want to mention that his economic legacy historic wage gains, investment in job growth, marred by inflation, of course, but numbers don’t lie. His economy was strong, Trump’s tariffs killed it. The nation’s GDP growth under Biden was impressive; rose at a solid 3.1 percent rate at the end of his term.

BEHAR: Unemployment very low.

HOSTIN: I was going to say, he was the president to oversee monthly job gains for the entirety of his presidency. And the U.S. – And get this, Donald Trump is supposed to be a builder, right? He’s the best builder ever. Well, the U.S. added 16.6 million jobs during Biden’s presidency, more than any during any four-year term of any previous president. That is what Donald Trump got.

What we got now, especially in his second quarter, stock market demolished, 401(K)s demolished, Department of Education demolished, DOGE demolishing things, federal government jobs gone. What good has he done to the economy?! What kind of businessman is that?! A bad one!

[Applause]

BEHAR: The way you describe it. Sounds like he wants — he’s like a nihilist, some body who wants to destroy everything.  

GOLDBERG: I think he’s angry at the country because I think he feels that Americans didn’t support him, he feels our allies didn’t support him and now he’s getting even. That’s how — because there’s no other reason to do what he’s doing. It doesn’t make sense to me.

(…)

CNN’s host of The Lead, Jake Tapper, tried to shame GOP Rep. Brandon Gill on Wednesday for trying to defund PBS and NPR by claiming, “PBS really helps little kids,” citing himself learning how to read by watching Sesame Street as an example. However, Tapper’s days in school were not complete as Gill informed him that the real issue is PBS’s “left-wing propaganda,” whether that be in its newsrooms or on Tapper’s beloved children’s programming.

Towards the end of their interview, Tapper wondered why Gill thinks PBS is such a big deal, “Speaker Johnson has said he would additionally like to cut funding for public broadcasting, PBS, which does receive some support from the federal government. I just — it’s interesting. I just have to say, on a personal level, I learned to read by watching Sesame Street and Mr. Roger’s Neighborhood and The Electric Company. That’s literally how I learned to read as a kid. Why do you not think PBS is important?”

 

 

Gill answered the question in two ways. First, he stood up for the basic principle that the government should not be funding media outlets, “One of those that we found, which Republicans and conservatives have talked about for decades, is state-sponsored media in the United States. China and North Korea have state-sponsored media. The United States does not need state-sponsored media. Listen, if Fox News or any other conservative news organization came to me and asked for taxpayer money, I would tell them no.”

Second, Gill brought the attention back to the actual news organization, “I certainly don’t think we should be funding left-wing propaganda outlets, like NPR or PBS. I had a hearing just a couple weeks ago where I got to question the head of NPR and asked her about some of the wild, outrageous things that she had been posting on the internet for the whole world to see, and she had no answer for that. The American people are sick of funding institutions who promote values that they find repugnant, and that’s what we’re doing with NPR and PBS.”

Tapper wasn’t convinced, “Okay. But Sesame Street, I mean, Daniel the Tiger, Wild Kratts, I mean, you have little kids, I know, and I’m sure you, you and your wife can bring them great educational programming. But a lot of kids might not have access to cable, and I didn’t when I was little because cable didn’t exist. But I mean, PBS really helps little kids. I mean, I’m talking specifically about kids learning how to read through Sesame Street in similar programming.”

Of course, Tapper undermined his own argument by illustrating how the media has changed since he was a child, but Gill also informed him Sesame Street isn’t purely a PBS property anymore, “Well, they’ve already spun off Sesame Street to HBO [Max], so that’s not with PBS anymore.”

It should be said that in December, Max announced it would no longer be producing new episodes of the series following the conclusion of its current season, but the point is that Sesame Street could still get picked up by another private entity such as Apple TV+, Amazon, or Netflix. Currently, one can watch Sesame Street on Max for $10 per month nine months before it airs on PBS.

Gill continued, “But what I don’t think the government should be doing is funding these institutions that are radically left-wing and are oftentimes even in their cartoon shows, geared towards young children, promoting far-left ideologies that are not teaching children how to read but are teaching them the trans agenda and other things that large portions of our country do not agree with. Our tax dollars should not be funding institutions and ideologies that are promoting values that many people, including the people of Texas 26, that I represent, find repulsive.”

Between the amount of money it makes from potential streaming partners, its presence at theme parks, and merchandise, Sesame Street will survive. The question for Tapper is why should half of America be forced to subsidize a media organization that acts like it is part of the opposition?

Sign the petition to help us defund another CNN in PBS and NPR at defundpbsnpr.org.

Here is a transcript for the April 30 show:

CNN The Lead with Jake Tapper

4/30/2025

6:10 PM ET

JAKE TAPPER: Speaker Johnson has said he would additionally like to cut funding for public broadcasting, PBS, which does receive some support from the federal government. I just — it’s interesting. I just have to say, on a personal level, I learned to read by watching Sesame Street and Mr. Roger’s Neighborhood and The Electric Company. That’s literally how I learned to read as a kid. Why do you not think PBS is important?

BRANDON GILL: Well, listen, we were — I’m a member of the DOGE Subcommittee of Oversight. We were tasked with finding waste, fraud, and abuse in the federal government and highlighting it. And one of those that we found, which Republicans and conservatives have talked about for decades, is state-sponsored media in the United States. China and North Korea have state-sponsored media. The United States does not need state-sponsored media.

Listen, if Fox News or any other conservative news organization came to me and asked for taxpayer money, I would tell them no. And I certainly don’t think we should be funding left-wing propaganda outlets, like NPR or PBS. I had a hearing just a couple weeks ago where I got to question the head of NPR and asked her about some of the wild, outrageous things that she had been posting on the internet for the whole world to see, and she had no answer for that.

The American people are sick of funding institutions who promote values that they find repugnant, and that’s what we’re doing with NPR and PBS. And that’s what we are hopefully soon, via a rescission bill, going to pull those funds back.

TAPPER: Okay. But Sesame Street, I mean, Daniel the Tiger, Wild Kratts, I mean, you have little kids, I know, and I’m sure you, you and your wife can bring them great educational programming. But a lot of kids might not have access to cable, and I didn’t when I was little because cable didn’t exist. But I mean, PBS really helps little kids. I mean, I’m talking specifically about kids learning how to read through Sesame Street in similar programming.

GILL: Well, they’ve already spun off Sesame Street to HBO, so that’s not with PBS anymore. But what I don’t think the government should be doing is funding these institutions that are radically left-wing and are oftentimes even in their cartoon shows, geared towards young children, promoting far-left ideologies that are not teaching children how to read but are teaching them the trans agenda and other things that large portions of our country do not agree with. Our tax dollars should not be funding institutions and ideologies that are promoting values that many people, including the people of Texas 26, that I represent, find repulsive.

TAPPER: All right. Congressman Brandon Gill, thanks so much. Good to see you, sir.

Government makes most things worse.

Lyndon Johnson launched a War on Poverty; Richard Nixon a War on Drugs.

Both had good intentions, but their “wars” do more harm than good.

I believed the War on Poverty would lift people out of poverty.

At the time I was a naive Princeton student who believed my professors when they said, “It’s wrong that in this rich country, people are poor, so government should fix that. Targeted programs will lift people out of poverty.”

Have they?

We’ve spent more than $30 trillion so far. Some people were helped.

When welfare began, the poverty rate dropped … dropped for seven years.

But then progress stopped. Since the 1970s, the number of Americans living in poverty rose and fell, but the initial success hasn’t repeated.

That’s because the handouts encourage people to become dependent. Welfare even discouraged marriage because a single parent gets a bigger check.

As a result, welfare created something never seen before in America: a permanent “underclass” — generations raised without fathers, generations who stay poor and passive.

It’s happened because people “are basically told, ‘you can’t take care of yourself’… It doesn’t encourage them to be ambitious,” says Yaron Brook, head of the Ayn Rand Institute, in my new video.

“Once you start paying people not to work … they don’t expect to take responsibility for their own lives.”

The War on Drugs also had unintended consequences.

“When you launch a war on drugs … you create huge profits for cartels because there’s so much at stake,” says Brook.

That led to more illegal drugs, and “massive corruption among police.”

I ask, just “let everybody take whatever poison they want?”

“Yes,” says Brook, echoing Ayn Rand, who said it is “the responsibility of the individual not to take the kind of things … which destroy his mind.”

Brook and I disagree about how to protect the environment. It’s one area where I think we do need government. Our air and water are cleaner now because the Environmental Protection Agency set some rules.

Brook says we could have accomplished that without the EPA, if individuals filed lawsuits.

“You pollute in some way that is clearly making me sick, we have legal redress to deal with that … But once you give it into the hands of bureaucrats … they want to regulate and control every activity that we’re engaged in.”

He cites California’s wildfires and water shortages as an example of “government gone wild.” (That’s also the title of my new book.)

Government has grown wildly. Even with DOGE cuts, it will still grow. It always does.

The EPA once imposed useful rules, but regulators always want more. Today, EPA should stand for Enough Protection Already!

“Northern California has plenty of water,” says Brook. “In the old days, they used to move massive amounts of water from the north to south. … These days, there’s still a lot of water available in the north that cannot be moved south because of some tiny little fish.”

That’s the delta smelt, protected by the Endangered Species Act.

“In the name of some little fish, they’re willing to shut down huge improvements to human life.”

If it’s not the smelt, it’s an endangered plant. Power companies wanted to install fire-resistant metal poles.

“They can’t widen fire lanes because there’s some plant that they had to uproot,”

“They were shut down by environmentalists because of this crazy plant … (also) they can’t widen fire lanes. The consequence, of course, is the burning down of thousands of homes. … When you place the value of a plant above the value of human life, that leads to destruction of human life.”

Brook’s point is not that people shouldn’t try to help the poor, the addicted, and the planet; it’s that individuals do it better than government ever will.

“All these government programs that regulate and control, they institutionalize mediocrity at best.”

On Thursday, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt held yet another unusual morning press briefing, but this time, her guest was Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller to provide barn-burning remarks on what the administration called President Trump’s first 100 days of “Restoring Common Sense.”

Miller repeatedly took the liberal media — living in safe, wealthy confines — to task, particularly for choosing dangerous illegal immigrants over American citizens.

He hit his crescendo in torching the leftist press when CBS’s Weijia Jiang asked whether the U.S. was doing anything to help bring home (alleged MS-13 gang member) Kilmar Abrego Garcia.

Miller first said diplomatic discussions are not for public consumption and then thanked El Salvador for its willingness to take dangerous illegal immigrants out the U.S. But from there, he turned up the heat with a case of bias by omission:

You may have seen recently an FBI assessment that was unclassified, that said that the Maduro regime is using and planning to use Tren de Aragua terrorists to carry out assassination plots on American soil. Now, very few in this room covered that. I’ll let you all ask yourselves why you didn’t cover it, and why your editors didn’t assign that story to you. That’s something I think you should think about on your own, but this is a Earth-shattering piece of news.

As for Abrego Garcia, he went through the facts about Abrego Garcia the liberal media have ignored because they’re too busy “obsessively try[ing] to shill for this MS-13 terrorist.”

Miller next struck at the heart of the liberal media’s obsession with “due process” for illegal immigrants by pointing out the victims of crimes by illegals weren’t granted any mercy. All the while, the liberal media coddle illegal immigrants from their luxurious and safe homes:

Miller led off the proceedings with a series of remarks about areas in which he said President Trump has restored common sense. After highlighting Trump stopping “the wave of racial discrimination, so-called diversity, equity, in exclusion policies,” and far-left academia, he arrived at the issue of transgenderism (and then immigration).

Watch Miller’s remarks below and you’ll see in the caption that this was greeted by the liberal press corps with crickets as nearly all the questions concerned tariffs:

Once he finished extolling the administration’s work on illegal immigration, Leavitt kicked off the Q&A with the “new media seat”:

Jiang’s first question concerned Amazon’s embarrassing faceplant when, prior to pushback from President Trump, considered putting a graphic on its Amazon Haul site to show added costs due to the new tariffs.

Miller blasted this failed proposal by noting they never did this with the burdensome regulations imposed by California (click “expand”):

JIANG: This administration has stressed the need for price transparency for things like health care bills and concert tickets. So why is it a political and hostile act for Amazon to display price transparency on consumer goods?

MILLER: Well, I think it’s the wrong way of looking at it, which is why would — first of all, that proposal is gone now. But why would Amazon, of all the different things that go into a theoretical price input — right — for example, does Amazon list the cost of California’s regulations on everything made in California? Anything you make in California, you have a massive price increase because of the health care regulations that are unworkable in that state, because of the labor regulations that are unworkable in that state, because of the subsidies that go to illegal aliens in that state, because of all the bureaucracy. So, anything being produced in California has a massive built in price hike. So, why wouldn’t Amazon have a list saying if you purchase it in California instead of in Alabama, this is the premium that you pay, that you pay? This is a clear attempt by whoever proposed it originally. I don’t know, because Amazon says they’re never going to do it to try to undermine our trade negotiations with China. I make another important point on this, which is that there have been many complaints about the fact that there are a lot of products that are sold on Amazon that are actually rip offs of American products that are then stolen by China, and that they take our IP and they put them into products to try to undersell our manufacturers, so to the extent that we are engaged in labeling issues on Amazon, I would say that would be the most significant one to fix is making sure we’re not undercutting American consumers.

It was left to Real America’s Voice’s Brian Glenn to not only close the briefing, but the only one to seek White House comment about former Vice President Kamala Harris’s speech from the night prior:

To see the relevant transcript from the May 1 briefing, click here.