When I saw the news that Vice President JD Vance would be appearing on “The View,” my concern as someone who works every day with right-of-center political voices was not about how he would perform. It was genuine confusion over why conservatives continue handing ratings, relevance, and credibility to the very institutions that have spent years demonizing them.
Nobody seriously doubts that JD Vance can handle “The View.” There may not be a Republican politician in America today better equipped for exactly that environment. Vance is quick, disciplined, and uniquely skilled at walking into hostile interviews without allowing himself to be defined by the hostility.
That ability is a large part of why many conservatives came to understand what Donald Trump saw in Vance. Plenty of Republicans questioned whether it was the right choice. The issue was not that Vance lacked intelligence or talent. The concern was that Trump had chosen someone who immediately found himself at the center of a damaging political controversy: the “childless cat lady” comments.
These comments became exactly the kind of media storm campaigns dread. Democrats saw an opening, critics argued they would alienate women voters, and many wondered whether Trump had created an unnecessary vulnerability for himself.
It was not until Vance sat across from Kristen Welker on “Meet the Press” in August 2024 that Trump’s confidence in Vance started to make sense. Vance did not dodge questions about his “cat lady” comments, nor did he retreat into meaningless consultant language. He pushed back where he disagreed and explained his broader argument, shifting the conversation toward families, affordability, and the pressures Americans face in building their lives.
Whether you support him or not, it has become impossible to ignore: JD Vance is an exceptionally gifted communicator. He can debate, think on his feet, and challenge people without appearing rattled. He has the rare political skill of walking directly into difficult conversations and coming out stronger.
That is why my concern with his appearance on “The View” has nothing to do with whether he will succeed. He almost certainly will. The issue is what happens when he does.
A strong performance from Vance means viral clips, massive attention, and renewed relevance for the very platform conservatives argue has spent years treating them with contempt.
This is not a random Republican commentator looking for exposure. This is the vice president of the United States and one of the most important figures in the future of the Republican Party. Whether or not he eventually runs for president, Vance is clearly positioned as one of the leading figures who could carry Trump’s political movement into its next chapter.
Access to someone like that has value, and “The View” is about to receive all the benefits that come with it.
The ratings will come. Clips will spread across every social media platform. Conservatives will celebrate Vance pushing back. Liberals will celebrate the hosts challenging him. Everyone will argue for days, and “The View” will have gotten exactly what it wanted: attention and relevance.
The question is why conservatives keep handing it to them.
For years, Republicans have argued that the problem with much of legacy media is not simply disagreement. Debate is necessary. Conservatives should sit down with people who see the world differently.
The problem is the contempt.
Shows like “The View” do not merely criticize Republican policies. They routinely portray Trump and his supporters as something darker than political opponents. Conservatives are labeled hateful, racist, dangerous, and morally defective. The disagreement is no longer simply about competing visions for the country. It has become a judgment about the character of the people who hold those views.
That rhetoric has consequences. America is living through an era of extraordinary political hostility. There have been multiple attempts on President Trump’s life. Political violence and dehumanization are no longer abstract concerns; they are realities.
Yet the institutions that contribute to this culture rarely have any incentive to change. They get to continue the same behavior and still receive access to the most important figures in the movement they spend their days attacking.
Joy Behar reinforced this disconnect last year when she suggested Republicans were not appearing on “The View” because they were afraid to face tough questions. The response from conservatives was immediate. Clay Travis, Buck Sexton, Riley Gaines, Matt Walsh, Jennifer Sey, and others pushed back with <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/media/conservatives-come-receipts-after-the-view-claims-theyre-afraid-come-show">receipts</a> showing a very different reality: they were not avoiding the show. They had been trying to get on it.
As a publicist who works primarily with right-of-center personalities, I can attest to the falsehood of Behar’s excuses firsthand. Conservatives are not afraid of “The View.” In fact, many actively seek opportunities to sit across from people who disagree with them and make their case to audiences outside the conservative bubble.
Conservatives are eager to enter those hostile rooms. But they are continually blocked from entering them at all.
But now, “The View” gets JD Vance. Not because the show has changed. Not because the conversation has improved. And not because there has been some meaningful effort to understand the voters the hosts have spent years mocking.
They get him because everyone knows it will make great television.
But what happens after the cameras turn off?
The hosts of “The View” are unlikely to walk away reconsidering how they talk about conservatives. The next day, the same conversations will continue. The same voters will be reduced to the same stereotypes. The same political divide everyone claims to worry about will remain exactly where it was.
And “The View” will have gotten everything it wanted.
It will have received the ratings, attention, and cultural relevance that come with hosting one of the most important figures in the Republican Party. And it will have received all of that without changing anything about how it covers conservatives.
That is the broken incentive structure.
If institutions can spend years demonizing conservatives and still receive access to the movement’s most influential voices whenever they want a viral moment, why would they ever change?
JD Vance has already proven he can walk into hostile rooms and win. The question now is whether conservatives should keep rewarding those rooms simply because they know how to win inside them.
***
Vanessa Santos is a political communications specialist and the president and CEO of Renegade DC.

JD Vance

JD Vance Brings The News To The View’s Fake News

ABC News

Conservatives

DW Opinion

Fake News

Media Bias

The View

ABC News anchor Jonathan Karl referenced Sun Tzu and &#8216;The Art of War&#8217; as he struggled on Sunday to piece together a cohesive strategy from President Donald Trump&#8217;s statements regarding his potential next moves in Iran.
Karl, on Sunday&#8217;s broadcast of &#8220;This Week,&#8221; presented a number of seemingly-conflicting statements and movements, saying that at times it was impossible to tell whether the Trump administration was planning to bring Operation Epic Fury to an end or further escalate the military action against the Iranian regime.
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
“Listening to President Trump’s words at any given moment, it sounds like the war is about to end — or it’s about to intensify.”
One month into the war with Iran, <a href="https://twitter.com/jonkarl?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@JonKarl</a> breaks down Trump’s often conflicting statements about the war&#8217;s developments.<a href="https://t.co/LMawxMOHLc">https://t.co/LMawxMOHLc</a> <a href="https://t.co/XuToAZZKLy">pic.twitter.com/XuToAZZKLy</a>
— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ThisWeekABC/status/2038242688458269151?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 29, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;In &#8216;The Art of War,&#8217; Sun Tzu wrote that a leader&#8217;s plans must be as dark and impenetrable as night,&#8221; Karl began, saying that Trump might not be basing his strategy on Sun Tzu but his plans were certainly difficult to pin down.
Karl highlighted the conflicting statements about developments in Iran, saying that Trump spent half the time talking about how many objectives had already been achieved — some, as he&#8217;s said on several occasions, ahead of schedule — while quietly moving to build up troops in the area, and perhaps signaling a coming escalation.
&#8220;Just consider his words over the past ten days,&#8221; Karl said. &#8220;On March 20th, he declared that he was &#8216;close to meeting his military objective and considering winding down our military efforts in the Middle East.&#8217; The very next day he announced a major escalation, threatening to &#8216;hit and obliterate&#8217; Iranian power infrastructure if the regime did not fully open the Strait of Hormuz.&#8221;
Just days later, Karl noted, Trump had announced that he&#8217;d been having &#8220;productive&#8221; conversations with officials regarding bringing hostilities to a close – but then extended the deadline more than once.
&#8220;Listening to President Trump&#8217;s words at any given moment, it sounds like the war is about to end — or it’s about to intensify,&#8221; Karl remarked.
Since the beginning of Operation Epic Fury, Trump and a number of his surrogates — including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and War Secretary Pete Hegseth have repeatedly made it clear that they would not, at least publicly, remove any military or diplomatic options from the table. That in conjunction with Trump&#8217;s apparently-conflicting statements and actions suggest that he has, in fact, taken &#8220;The Art of War&#8221; to heart.

ABC News: Election Night 2020

Jon Karl Digs Into Sun Tzu To Wrap His Brain Around Trump’s Iran Strategy

Donald Trump

Iran

Jonathan Karl

Media

Military

Pete Hegseth

Politics

Democrats and the legacy media have been spinning since the very beginning of President Donald Trump&#8217;s military actions against the Iranian regime. Over the span of two weeks, they have pulled out all the stops to win the battle of narratives and convince the world that it was wrong to strike Iran — or if it was right to strike Iran, this was the wrong time. And if it was the right time to strike Iran, then Trump is doing it wrong.
For those who don&#8217;t spend their Sunday mornings glued to the television — and their Sunday afternoons attempting to dig through a week&#8217;s worth of network and cable news media spin — The Daily Wire has compiled a short summary of what you may have missed.
On ABC News, for example, Martha Raddatz spoke with Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA). He agreed that Iran was &#8220;a problem,&#8221; but immediately pivoted to argue that &#8220;war&#8221; was not the proper response to every problem. He then went on to draw a comparison between Iran and previous military actions in Libya, Iraq, and Afghanistan — and he argued that they were all essentially the same.
&#8220;Yes, Iran is a problem. A problem that needs to be contained. But what we should have learned from Muammar Gaddafi and Saddam Hussein and the Taliban is, you can have a threat and not have a military solution that’s going to make it better.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560">
BREAKING: Rep. Adam Smith tells Martha Raddatz that “war is not always the answer to a problem.”
“Yes, Iran is a problem. A problem that needs to be contained. But what we should have learned from Muammar Gaddafi and Saddam Hussein and the Taliban… <a href="https://t.co/C5oi0rvSQy">pic.twitter.com/C5oi0rvSQy</a>
— Axel Vesa (@AxelVesa1) <a href="https://twitter.com/AxelVesa1/status/2033209072921481404?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 15, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Smith also offered a comparison to Venezuela and the recent operation to extract former President Nicolás Maduro, adding, &#8220;Iran is not Venezuela. We can’t just fly in, snatch the president and make things change.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Rep. Adam Smith on President Trump’s foreign policy: “Iran is not Venezuela. We can’t just fly in, snatch the president and make things change.” <a href="https://t.co/LLgvsyy61S">https://t.co/LLgvsyy61S</a> <a href="https://t.co/ns5XiVOxU0">pic.twitter.com/ns5XiVOxU0</a>
— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ThisWeekABC/status/2033191028044271657?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 15, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
On CNN&#8217;s &#8220;State of the Union,&#8221; anchor Jake Tapper brought in former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, who promptly declared that the action in Iran was proof that &#8220;this is clearly amateur hour at the Pentagon and in the White House.&#8221;
Buttigieg, after claiming that former Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden had secured nuclear deals that prevented Iran from gaining access to nuclear weapons, argued that President Trump had rushed into war because he was unable to get &#8220;a better deal&#8221; and had done so without any kind of planning or preparation.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Pete Buttigieg on the war with Iran: &#8220;This is clearly amateur hour at the Pentagon and in the White House&#8221; <a href="https://t.co/liOQlGQ50w">pic.twitter.com/liOQlGQ50w</a>
— State of the Union (@CNNSOTU) <a href="https://twitter.com/CNNSOTU/status/2033192256820121841?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 15, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Tapper took a pause to defend the media&#8217;s oppositional stance, arguing that he and others doing the same were not being critical because they wanted the United States to lose, but because they were just doing their jobs.
&#8220;Every reporter that I know wants the United States to succeed in every way, and the way that reporters help that happen is by asking questions of people in power and not blindly cheering on leaders who take the nation to war,&#8221; he claimed.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
TAPPER: “Every reporter that I know wants the United States to succeed in every way, and the way that reporters help that happen is by asking questions of people in power and not blindly cheering on leaders who take the nation to war.” <a href="https://t.co/KtfZYSnBJU">pic.twitter.com/KtfZYSnBJU</a>
— State of the Union (@CNNSOTU) <a href="https://twitter.com/CNNSOTU/status/2033185159428591690?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 15, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Margaret Brennan, on &#8220;Face the Nation,&#8221; spoke to several who reinforced the Democrat-driven narrative that the Trump administration was in over its head in Iran.
Former CIA operative Joey Gannon told her that Iran had moved to keep supreme leadership in the Khamenei family because it sent a signal to the world that the regime still had complete control.
&#8220;So, he was a gatekeeper for the supreme leader&#8217;s office in the past. He has strong ties to the IRGC and the Basij, he knows how power actually operates, and he is, effectively, a symbol of continuity right now,&#8221; he explained.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Former CIA operative Jonny Gannon says the decision to appoint Motjaba Khameini as the new supreme leader “is the message from the regime that they are still in control.”
Mojtaba Khamenei is clearly not a charming public face; what he is is a systems operator,” he says. “So, he… <a href="https://t.co/oP6zveXtvO">pic.twitter.com/oP6zveXtvO</a>
— Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) <a href="https://twitter.com/FaceTheNation/status/2033222131090084297?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 15, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Samantha Vinograd, an Obama administration alum, took the same posture when she argued that Iran was essentially outwitting the United States strategically.
&#8220;The Iranian regime has demonstrated an incredible capacity to be flexible and adaptive,&#8221; she said, adding, &#8220;They played a long game here. They have invested in propaganda and tools in this country, as well as hiring people to do their dirty work for them, to such an extent that I am concerned that they have the intent and capability to, if not direct attacks here in the homeland, to inspire them .&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Former Homeland Security official Samantha Vinograd says “the Iranian regime has demonstrated an incredible capacity to be flexible and adaptive” in the way they carry out attacks.
“They played a long game here. They have invested in propaganda and tools in this country, as… <a href="https://t.co/GgKqrE9CEG">pic.twitter.com/GgKqrE9CEG</a>
— Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) <a href="https://twitter.com/FaceTheNation/status/2033219553694503149?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 15, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Senator Mark Warner (D-VA) told Brennan that he did not believe the Iranian regime — despite a 47-year record of Iran and its proxies killing over 1,000 American service members and civilians and a recent boast that the regime had nearly enough enriched uranium for almost a dozen nuclear bombs — posed an &#8220;imminent threat&#8221; to the United States. What&#8217;s more, Warner argued that Iran did not pose an immediate threat to Israel — despite Iranian proxies in Hamas and Hezbollah striking Israeli targets on a regular basis.
&#8220;There was no imminent threat to the United States, and I don&#8217;t believe there was even an imminent threat to Israel from Iran,&#8221; Warner declared. &#8220;Over a period of time, particularly with the ballistic missile capability, Israel would be more under threat. The decision to go to war in this case was a choice by President Trump.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) says he stands by the 2025 Annual Threat Assessment by U.S. intelligence leaders who testified at the time that Iran had not reauthorized their nuclear weapons program.
“There was no imminent threat to the United States, and I don&#8217;t believe there was… <a href="https://t.co/MLJA4YT5Gc">pic.twitter.com/MLJA4YT5Gc</a>
— Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) <a href="https://twitter.com/FaceTheNation/status/2033215927228002331?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 15, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Jake Tapper

Spin Cycle: Dems, Media Wage War Over Who Controls The Narrative In Iran

CBS News

Democrats

Israel

Middle East

NBC News

American military action in Iran has entered its second week — and the political war at home is in full swing. Democrats and legacy media are racing to brand President Donald Trump the architect of yet another “forever war,” accusing him of violating the Constitution and demanding he seek congressional approval if he wants to continue bombing Iran.
For those who don&#8217;t spend their weekends glued to the television — and their Sunday afternoons attempting to dig through a week&#8217;s worth of network and cable news media spin — The Daily Wire has compiled a short summary of what you may have missed.
In addition to complaining about Trump taking action without first getting the support of Congress, the key note struck by legacy media outlets was the notion that war with Iran — which has thus far lasted just over a week — will necessarily snowball into the same kind of long, drawn-out affair the United States saw in Iraq and Afghanistan: a &#8220;forever war.&#8221;
To kick off the weekend, Senator Adam Schiff (D-CA) sat down with HBO host and comedian <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-bill-maher-tricks-adam-schiff-who-thought-he-was-criticizing-donald-trump">Bill Maher</a>, where he repeated the same refrain being sung by most Democrats: Trump must first go to Congress.
Maher quickly laid a rhetorical trap for the lawmaker: &#8220;This statement from the administration: ‘The president had the constitutional authority to direct the use of military force because he could reasonably determine that such use of force was in the national interest.’ That’s too vague for you?”
“Totally vague,” Schiff agreed.
Maher dropped the other shoe then, saying, “OK. Because that’s from Obama about Libya.”
Schiff scrambled, saying that then-President Barack Obama had taken the issue to Congress when he wanted to take action in Syria in 2013. He ignored Obama&#8217;s 2011 actions in Libya entirely, largely because the Obama administration continued those actions for months without ever getting congressional approval.
By Sunday morning, the narrative had shifted to focus on whether or not Iran would be another &#8220;forever war.&#8221;
On ABC&#8217;s &#8220;This Week,&#8221; anchor Martha Raddatz spoke with correspondent Ian Pannell about the objectives — which they said were thus far unclear — and suggested that it would be difficult to evaluate whether the U.S. and Israeli coalition had &#8220;won,&#8221; and if so, when.
&#8220;The president tells us we’re winning. How do we know that we’re winning, and if we don’t know that, how do we know when it ends?&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
ABC News’ Ian Pannell joins Martha Raddatz in Jerusalem as the UAE joins the U.S. and Israel in firing shots into Iran: “The president tells us we’re winning. How do we know that we’re winning, and if we don’t know that, how do we know when it ends?” <a href="https://t.co/zjSQAcbPh6">https://t.co/zjSQAcbPh6</a> <a href="https://t.co/1XV7irvDGi">pic.twitter.com/1XV7irvDGi</a>
— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ThisWeekABC/status/2030643012712235099?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 8, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
U.S. Ambassador to the UN Mike Waltz pushed back on Raddatz later in the show, explaining that the objectives in Iran were fairly straightforward. The Trump administration, he says, is &#8220;focused on an Iran that can no longer pose a threat to Americans, in an American-first foreign policy, but also no longer pose a threat to our allies in the region.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
U.S. ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz tells Martha Raddatz that President Trump “is focused on an Iran that can no longer pose a threat to Americans, in an American-first foreign policy, but also no longer pose a threat to our allies in the region.” <a href="https://t.co/FIig18PSLv">https://t.co/FIig18PSLv</a> <a href="https://t.co/wHxMAznCAY">pic.twitter.com/wHxMAznCAY</a>
— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ThisWeekABC/status/2030646528130380055?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 8, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Admiral (Ret.) Mike Mullen, who served as chairman of the Joint Chiefs at the end of former President George W. Bush&#8217;s last term and the beginning of former President Barack Obama&#8217;s first, warned that wars can start small and grow quickly, especially if the declared objectives change in any way.
&#8220;Wars expand, objectives change, circumstances come up that you didn&#8217;t expect,&#8221; he said.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Retired Adm. Mike Mullen, former chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that he worries the current war with Iran could drag on for years: “Wars expand, objectives change, circumstances come up that you didn&#8217;t expect.” <a href="https://t.co/6dNhTiUoMP">https://t.co/6dNhTiUoMP</a> <a href="https://t.co/UG2pVmwtjy">pic.twitter.com/UG2pVmwtjy</a>
— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ThisWeekABC/status/2030656131920507184?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 8, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;Yes, the [Iranian] supreme leader is dead, but I don&#8217;t think the regime change that we&#8217;re talking about is represented just by that,&#8221; Mullen added, saying that &#8220;the regime is embedded, deep, dedicated, and sees this war as a war of survival for Iran.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
“Yes, the [Iranian] supreme leader is dead, but I don&#8217;t think the regime change that we&#8217;re talking about is represented just by that.” Ret. Admiral Mike Mullen says that he thinks “the regime is embedded, deep, dedicated, and sees this war as a war of survival for Iran.” <a href="https://t.co/F5yMWOLhcf">pic.twitter.com/F5yMWOLhcf</a>
— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ThisWeekABC/status/2030656639414460636?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 8, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
On CNN&#8217;s &#8220;State of the Union,&#8221; anchor Jake Tapper pressed Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) on his vow to vote against funding for any military action in Iran.
&#8220;You have said you&#8217;re a &#8216;hell no&#8217; on funding the war. We have seen this movie before. We know that vote will be cast as — especially if you run for higher office — you voting against the troops,&#8221; Tapper prompted.
&#8220;Oh come on I mean, the American people don&#8217;t want this war,&#8221; Murphy scoffed. &#8220;They don&#8217;t want this war. They have seen what happens when American troops go into places like Iraq, places like Afghanistan. Ultimately we get a lot of people killed, we waste a lot of dollars, the one thing the American people are clear about is they do not want the United States dragged into another long term war in the Middle East.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
TAPPER: &#8220;You have said you&#8217;re a &#8216;hell no&#8217; on funding the war. We have seen this movie before. We know that vote will be cast as &#8211; especially if you run for higher office &#8211; you voting against the troops.&#8221;
MURPHY: &#8220;Oh come on I mean, the American people don&#8217;t want this war.&#8221; <a href="https://t.co/lTB5isM8I7">pic.twitter.com/lTB5isM8I7</a>
— State of the Union (@CNNSOTU) <a href="https://twitter.com/CNNSOTU/status/2030640466153107679?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 8, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Although President Trump has said that he is willing to continue military action in Iran as long as it takes to achieve his objectives, his initial assessment was that the entire thing could be handled in a matter of weeks.

Chris Murphy

Spin Cycle: Media, Dems Dub Iran ‘Forever War’ As Conflict Expands To Second Week

Spin Cycle: Media, Dems Dub Iran 'Forever War' As Conflict Expands To Second Week

President Donald Trump is barely into his second year of his second term, and Democrats and the legacy media are still pulling out all the stops to cast doubt on the people he has chosen to serve as Cabinet members across his administration.
For those who don&#8217;t spend their Sunday mornings glued to the television — and their Sunday afternoons attempting to dig through a week&#8217;s worth of network and cable news media spin — The Daily Wire has compiled a short summary of what you may have missed.
There was no shortage of breaking news on Sunday — from coverage of the Winter Olympics to the latest on the suspected kidnapping of Nancy Guthrie — but that didn&#8217;t stop the Sunday political talk shows from focusing on a few key members of the president Trump&#8217;s Cabinet. Several high profile politicians took to the airwaves to express their concern in the ability of certain Cabinet members to carry out their responsibilities.
On ABC&#8217;s &#8220;This Week,&#8221; host Martha Raddatz spoke with Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) about a combative exchange he&#8217;d had with Attorney General Pam Bondi earlier in the week, and asked whether he still had &#8220;confidence&#8221; in her ability to serve in that particular role.
&#8220;I don’t think Pam Bondi has confidence in Pam Bondi,&#8221; Massie said. &#8220;She wasn&#8217;t confident to engage in anything but name-calling in the hearing, so no, I don&#8217;t have confidence in her. She doesn&#8217;t have any sort of accountability there at the DOJ.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
When asked by ABC News’ Martha Raddatz whether he has confidence in Pam Bondi as attorney general, Rep. Massie responded: “I don’t think Pam Bondi has confidence in Pam Bondi.” <a href="https://t.co/v6q311NGOu">https://t.co/v6q311NGOu</a> <a href="https://t.co/vqhcQ9kV3r">pic.twitter.com/vqhcQ9kV3r</a>
— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ThisWeekABC/status/2023055290904543673?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 15, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
At Raddatz&#8217;s suggestion, Massie went on to criticize Bondi for failing to address the victims of convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, some of whom were present in the Capitol Hill hearing — and he argued that it was &#8220;cold&#8221; on her part and that she may have been afraid to do so.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Rep. Thomas Massie reacts to the image of Attorney General Pam Bondi not looking at the Epstein victims behind her during a hearing: “I think she was afraid to.” <a href="https://t.co/eiC9PK4xdH">https://t.co/eiC9PK4xdH</a> <a href="https://t.co/FgRK4lyPiS">pic.twitter.com/FgRK4lyPiS</a>
— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ThisWeekABC/status/2023052573532447151?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 15, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
On CBS News, &#8220;Face the Nation&#8221; host Margaret Brennan pressed Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA) to weigh in on discrepancies between previous admissions made by Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and information that has come out of the recently-released Epstein-related documents.
Garcia said that he and some others in Congress would like to speak with Lutnick — who has conceded that he had &#8220;limited interactions&#8221; with Epstein — but that he&#8217;s gotten no response from Republicans on how and when that might come about.
&#8220;Not only did [Lutnick] visit the island, he had tons of communication with Jeffrey Epstein after it was already known that Jeffrey Epstein was essentially convicted for preying on children. So, it is shameful that he is actually in our government. He should not be the commerce secretary. He should come talk to the Oversight Committee,&#8221; Garcia said.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA) says the House Oversight Committee has asked Republican Chairman James Comer (R-KY) to “bring in [Commerce Secretary] Lutnick” for questioning on his relationship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, but “have had no response.”
“Not only did… <a href="https://t.co/PSkJpmwOpN">pic.twitter.com/PSkJpmwOpN</a>
— Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) <a href="https://twitter.com/FaceTheNation/status/2023094193409646947?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 15, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Credit: @FaceTheNation/X.com
CNN anchor Jake Tapper raised the question regarding Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, asking several guests about recent comments she made on making sure &#8220;the right people&#8221; were voting in American elections.
Noem herself explained that she was talking about the role played by the Department of Homeland Security in ensuring that elections were secure — primarily by preventing illegal aliens from remaining in the United States and voting in American elections — and accused media personalities of &#8220;manufacturing&#8221; outrage over something that should have been straightforward.
&#8220;It must be exhausting to regularly manufacture outrage even over the most commonsense statement,&#8221; she said.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer responded to Noem&#8217;s statement, saying, &#8220;That&#8217;s a lot of bull.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
&#8220;That&#8217;s a lot of bull.&#8221;
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer reacts to DHS Secretary Kristi Noem&#8217;s comments about making sure &#8220;we have the right people voting, electing the right leaders.&#8221; <a href="https://t.co/6bjFePUPBr">pic.twitter.com/6bjFePUPBr</a>
— State of the Union (@CNNSOTU) <a href="https://twitter.com/CNNSOTU/status/2023039537056788898?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 15, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Credit: @CNNSOTU/X.com
Tapper pressed Border Czar Tom Homan to answer for Noem as well, but he wasn&#8217;t having it. Instead, he told Tapper that he&#8217;d have to ask Noem directly if he wanted to know what she&#8217;d meant.
&#8220;That would be a question for the secretary&#8230; That would be something she&#8217;d have to answer,&#8221; Homan said, later adding, &#8220;Do me and Secretary Noem agree on everything? No &#8230; It&#8217;s one team, one fight. I&#8217;m not going to divide this administration.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
TAPPER: &#8220;What does [Noem] mean when she says &#8216;electing the right leaders&#8217;? That&#8217;s not really immigration enforcement or DHS responsibility.&#8221;
HOMAN: &#8220;I don&#8217;t know. That would be a question for the secretary&#8230; That would be something she&#8217;d have to answer.&#8221; <a href="https://t.co/Btz1dpSf0i">pic.twitter.com/Btz1dpSf0i</a>
— State of the Union (@CNNSOTU) <a href="https://twitter.com/CNNSOTU/status/2023068352369803597?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 15, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Credit: @CNNSOTU/X.com
Tapper also raised the same question with Governor Andy Beshear (D-KY), who called Noem&#8217;s comments &#8220;un-American.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Gov. Beshear says DHS Secretary Kristi Noem&#8217;s comments about &#8220;electing the right leaders&#8221; are &#8220;wild and they are un-American.&#8221; <a href="https://t.co/EOW55pqBAv">pic.twitter.com/EOW55pqBAv</a>
— State of the Union (@CNNSOTU) <a href="https://twitter.com/CNNSOTU/status/2023070275126853884?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 15, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Credit: @CNNSOTU/X.com

Kristi Noem

Spin Cycle: In Shocking Twist, Dems And Media Still Don’t Like Trump’s Cabinet

Spin Cycle: In Shocking Twist, Dems And Media Still Don't Like Trump's Cabinet

Epstein Files

Jeffrey Epstein

Pam Bondi

Two prominent Democrats — one in the House and one in the Senate — spoke out on Sunday against a move suggested by President Donald Trump even though both championed a similar move five years earlier when their party was in control.
For those who don&#8217;t spend their Sunday mornings glued to the television — and their Sunday afternoons attempting to dig through a week&#8217;s worth of network and cable news media spin — The Daily Wire has compiled a short summary of what you may have missed.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) and Senator Adam Schiff (D-CA) both responded to President Trump&#8217;s wild suggestion that Republicans should &#8220;nationalize&#8221; voting, saying that laws dictating election procedures, constitutionally speaking, belonged to the individual states.
Trump sparked the debate with an apparently off-the-cuff comment during an interview with former FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino, when he said of the illegal aliens who&#8217;d flooded into the United States through former President Joe Biden&#8217;s open border, &#8220;If we don’t get them out, Republicans will never win another election.&#8221;
<p class="paragraph-elevate inline-placeholder vossi-paragraph_elevate" data-uri="cms.cnn.com/_components/paragraph/instances/cml7ho4w6000g3b63o4jdjpeq@published" data-editable="text" data-component-name="paragraph" data-article-gutter="true">&#8220;The Republicans should say, ‘We want to take over.’ We should take over the voting, in at least, many, 15 places,&#8221; Trump added then. &#8220;The Republicans ought to nationalize the voting.&#8221;
The White House later explained that Trump had been referring to states where he believed election fraud was a real problem, and the president has not previously pushed the notion of &#8220;nationalizing&#8221; voting — but that did not stop Jeffries and Schiff from running with the idea as if he had.
The House Minority Leader joined CNN anchor Dana Bash to discuss the situation on &#8220;State of the Union,&#8221; and she began by noting that Republicans had argued that passing the SAVE Act — which would require all voters in the United States to show proof of citizenship at the polls — was the best way to prevent voter fraud in any state.
&#8220;I understand that you don&#8217;t support things like a passport, for example,&#8221; Bash began. &#8220;But requiring basic ID in order to vote is really popular. A Pew poll from a few months ago showed 83% of Americans, including 71% of your fellow Democrats, support requiring an ID to vote. Why are they wrong?&#8221;
&#8220;I haven&#8217;t said that they&#8217;re wrong,&#8221; Jeffries insisted before explaining why he was still opposed to the measure. &#8220;We know that states are the ones that are empowered to conduct elections, and every state should be allowed to decide the best way to proceed to ensure that there&#8217;s a free and fair election.&#8221;
&#8220;The question is that — what Republicans are trying to do is to engage in clear and blatant voter suppression,&#8221; he added. &#8220;They know that if there&#8217;s a free and fair election in November, they&#8217;re going to lose! In fact, Republicans have been losing every single election since Donald Trump was sworn in in January of last year, including most recently, decisively, in Texas.&#8221;
Bash pressed again, asking whether it would be worth it, since Democrats favor voter ID laws as well, to &#8220;take that off the table&#8221; as a point of contention: &#8220;Maybe not a passport or a birth certificate, but show ID.&#8221;
&#8220;Every state is empowered to be able to make the decision on their own,&#8221; Jeffries protested. &#8220;What Donald Trump wants to do is try to nationalize the election. Translation: steal it. And we&#8217;re not going to let it happen.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries on Trump&#8217;s call for Republicans to &#8220;take over&#8221; running elections: &#8220;What Donald Trump wants to do is try to nationalize the election. Translation: steal it. And we&#8217;re not going to let it happen.&#8221; <a href="https://t.co/jGflGaguAn">pic.twitter.com/jGflGaguAn</a>
— State of the Union (@CNNSOTU) <a href="https://twitter.com/CNNSOTU/status/2020505995571548305?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 8, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Schiff took a similar tone with &#8220;This Week&#8221; host Jonathan Karl, who asked the California Senator to explain what the president meant when he&#8217;d told Bongino he wanted to &#8220;nationalize&#8221; voting in certain places.
&#8220;Senator, what does he mean? What do you think he means?&#8221; Karl asked.
&#8220;I think he fully intends to subvert the elections,&#8221; Schiff declared. &#8220;He will do everything he can to suppress the vote.&#8221;
Schiff, who still has not provided the evidence he claimed to have regarding President Trump and Russian collusion, went on to insist that Trump would take action if he did not like how the elections played out: &#8220;He&#8217;s prepared to try to take some kind of action to overturn the result, and we really shouldn&#8217;t question that.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Sen. Adam Schiff on President Trump’s call to “nationalize” state elections: “He&#8217;s prepared to try to take some kind of action to overturn the result, and we really shouldn&#8217;t question that.&#8221; <a href="https://t.co/mPgqzgikhs">https://t.co/mPgqzgikhs</a> <a href="https://t.co/qKxEiiUyuh">pic.twitter.com/qKxEiiUyuh</a>
— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ThisWeekABC/status/2020518333938847909?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 8, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
And yet both Jeffries and Schiff were all in when their own party pushed for national control over elections via 2021&#8217;s H.R. 1 — laughably nicknamed the &#8220;For the People Act.&#8221;
The bill&#8217;s purpose, according to the Democrats who wrote it, sounded reasonable enough: &#8220;To expand American&#8217;s access to the ballot box, reduce the influence of big money in politics, strengthen ethics rules for public servants, and implement other anti-corruption measures for the purpose of fortifying our democracy and for other purposes.&#8221;
But as former Manager of Election Law Reform Initiative at The Heritage Foundation Hans Von Spakovsky explained, what <a href="https://www.heritage.org/election-integrity/heritage-explains-if-hr-1-passes">the bill would actually</a> have done was pretty much the exact opposite of what its stated &#8220;purpose&#8221; suggested.
&#8220;A better description of it is that this bill would be a federal takeover and nationalization of the running and administration of elections, basically taking it away from the states,&#8221; he said.
Spakovsky, who has since joined Advancing American Freedom as a senior legal fellow, added, “It would change election rules to make it easier to cheat and easier to manipulate election results. And on the ethics and campaign finance rule changes, it&#8217;s designed to restrict and chill speech, political speech and political activity. So it&#8217;s just &#8230; this is one of the worst bills I&#8217;ve ever seen in my years in Washington.&#8221;

House Minority Leader Jeffries Holds Capitol Hill Press Conference

Spin Cycle: Democrats Come Out Hard Against The Thing They Voted For In 2021

Adam Schiff

Elections

Hakeem Jeffries

While Democrats move to potentially trigger yet another government shutdown over the Trump&#8217;s administration insistence in allowing Immigration and Customs Enforcement to enforce federal immigration law, former CNN host Don Lemon says he &#8220;ain&#8217;t worried&#8221; that his connection to a church-disrupting protest could land him behind bars.
For those who don&#8217;t spend their Sunday mornings glued to the television — and their Sunday afternoons attempting to dig through a week&#8217;s worth of network and cable news media spin — The Daily Wire has compiled a short summary of what you may have missed.
Across multiple media outlets, the Trump administration&#8217;s continued efforts to apprehend and deport criminal illegal aliens are still front page, above-the-fold news. Flashpoints in areas facing major crackdowns — such as Minneapolis — have resulted in a series of viral narratives that all too often have beaten the truth to the punch.
On Sunday, a week after Alex Pretti was killed by Border Patrol agents in Minneapolis and just days after Lemon was arrested in connection with a protest at Cities Church, much of the commentary was focused on the Democrats in Congress and whether they would leverage the threat of another government shutdown against funding for the Department of Homeland Security — specifically: ICE.
On ABC&#8217;s &#8220;This Week,&#8221; House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries called for extensive reforms within the Department of Homeland Security — including a measure that requires federal agents to not wear masks despite exponential increases in assaults against federal agents and threats against them and their families.
Jeffries also called for <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/heres-how-democrats-could-cripple-ice-without-defunding-dhs">judicial warrants</a> to be required for immigration arrests — a move that, by most accounts, would cripple efforts to arrest and deport criminal illegal aliens in a timely fashion.
&#8220;There would be no more immigration arrests,” a source within Immigration and Customs Enforcement told The Daily Wire. “It’s the functional equivalent of getting a warrant before issuing a speeding ticket. It’s the entire reason why ‘administrative’ arrests exist in the first place. If every single illegal alien who is charged with ‘Entry without Inspection’ was treated like a criminal arrest then they would have, among other things, right to counsel provided by the United States would be impossible.”
Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) echoed that sentiment on CNN&#8217;s &#8220;State of the Union, telling CNN anchor Dana Bash, &#8220;Demanding judicial warrants is [Democrats&#8217;] sneaky way of basically neutering our ability to enforce any immigration laws.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
GOP Sen. Ron Johnson: &#8220;Demanding judicial warrants is [Democrats&#8217;] sneaky way of basically neutering our ability to enforce any immigration laws.&#8221; <a href="https://t.co/SQjQjavb16">pic.twitter.com/SQjQjavb16</a>
— State of the Union (@CNNSOTU) <a href="https://twitter.com/CNNSOTU/status/2017994421996834826?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 1, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Credit: @CNNSOTU/X.com
But Jeffries was adamant: &#8220;ICE agents should conduct themselves like every other law enforcement agency in the country as opposed to running around — masked thugs, in many instances unleashing brutality on law-abiding American citizens.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Rep. Hakeem Jeffries calls the Senate-passed funding deal “a meaningful step in the right direction,” but adds that “we need a robust path toward dramatic reform. The administration can&#8217;t just talk the talk. They need to walk the walk.” <a href="https://t.co/ewJ2fbuHm5">pic.twitter.com/ewJ2fbuHm5</a>
— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ThisWeekABC/status/2017999655968121137?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 1, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Credit: @ThisWeekABC/X.com
Democrat operative-turned ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos also spoke with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche during Sunday&#8217;s broadcast, asking him to defend Don Lemon&#8217;s arrest. Stephanopoulos asked Blanche if perhaps the Justice Department was in the wrong by suggesting Lemon had crossed the line between reporting on the protest and becoming a part of it.
Blanche pushed back, saying that Lemon&#8217;s indictment was public and anyone who chose to do so could read the charges for themselves.
&#8220;Nobody in this country should feel comfortable storming into a church while it&#8217;s ongoing and disrupting that church service and thinking that we&#8217;re just going to stand by and let that happen,&#8221; Blanche added.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Deputy AG Todd Blanche on the arrest of journalist Don Lemon: “Nobody in this country should feel comfortable storming into a church while it&#8217;s ongoing and disrupting that church service and thinking that we&#8217;re just going to stand by and let that happen.” <a href="https://t.co/3BFEBVPRR2">https://t.co/3BFEBVPRR2</a> <a href="https://t.co/AaRU7EuApD">pic.twitter.com/AaRU7EuApD</a>
— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ThisWeekABC/status/2017983385147212029?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 1, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Credit: @ThisWeekABC/X.com
Lemon also took to the airwaves to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/don-lemon-aint-even-worried-about-getting-locked-up-after-arrest">address his arrest</a>, telling his audience that his arrest had only helped him to see things more clearly — and that he was only going to be more outspoken in the future.
&#8220;So I know that there are people who think like oh, you know, do this, and I’m going to be locked up or whatever. I ain’t worried about that. You heard the truth, and the truth shall make you free. I ain’t even worried about that. Like not. Don’t even think about it,&#8221; Lemon said.
CNN anchor Dana Bash pressed Blanche on Lemon&#8217;s arrest as well, asking whether it might have been done because Lemon and Trump have often been at odds rather than because Lemon had done anything that warranted such a response.
&#8220;Was it about trying to make an example out of somebody who the President has sparred with?&#8221; Bash asked.
&#8220;I don&#8217;t even know that the President has even ever thought of Don Lemon,&#8221; Blanche replied.
Trump, aboard Air Force One on Saturday, made it clear that he did not care for Lemon — but he also said that he&#8217;d had no advance knowledge that the former CNN host was going to be arrested.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Dana Bash pushes Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche on the arrest of former CNN journalist Don Lemon:
BASH: &#8220;Was it about trying to make an example out of somebody who the President has sparred with?&#8221;
BLANCHE: &#8220;I don&#8217;t even know that the President has even ever thought of… <a href="https://t.co/pA2bCGgVjC">pic.twitter.com/pA2bCGgVjC</a>
— State of the Union (@CNNSOTU) <a href="https://twitter.com/CNNSOTU/status/2017970465508122635?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 1, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Credit: @CNNSOTU/X.com
On &#8220;Face the Nation,&#8221; CBS News anchor Margaret Brennan hosted a roundtable discussion with several mayors from around the United States to talk about the tensions between federal and local authorities with regard to immigration enforcement.
&#8220;Oklahoma City Mayor David Holt, a Republican, said that “mayors are certainly caught in a little bit of an impossible situation &#8230; When the federal government and federal law enforcement comes into your city, we are fully subservient to that in the eyes of the law, and we also believe in the rule of law. So, we get caught kind of in the middle of these tensions, and we need a federal government who will use discretion and restraint with that power.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Republican Oklahoma City, OK, Mayor David Holt said that “mayors are certainly caught in a little bit of an impossible situation” with federal law enforcement in cities.
“When the federal government and federal law enforcement comes into your city, we are fully subservient to… <a href="https://t.co/xB4nk6oOPj">pic.twitter.com/xB4nk6oOPj</a>
— Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) <a href="https://twitter.com/FaceTheNation/status/2018016343803445466?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 1, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Credit: @FaceTheNation/X.com
In the last week, Trump has shaken up the personnel on the ground in Minneapolis, sending border czar Tom Homan in to oversee the efforts.
And if we know Tom Homan, we know he &#8220;ain&#8217;t worried.&#8221;

MixCollage-30-Jan-2026-03-55-PM-1994

Spin Cycle: Don Lemon ‘Ain’t Worried’ And DOJ Takes The Heat On ICE

Spin Cycle: Don Lemon, On ICE

Don Lemon

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)

ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos did his best to run cover for ousted CNN anchor Don Lemon — but Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche quickly pushed back.
Stephanopoulos spoke with Blanche during Sunday morning&#8217;s broadcast of &#8220;This Week,&#8221; where they discussed the Justice Department&#8217;s move to arrest Lemon over his participation in a protest that disrupted a Sunday service at a Minneapolis church days earlier. Despite video that appears to show him conferring with the protesters prior to their coordinated incursion, Lemon has insisted that he was simply acting as a journalist at the time and had nothing to do with the protest itself.
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
🚨 HOLY CRAP! Deputy AG Todd Blanche just CALLED OUT Fake News ABC George Stephanopoulos to his FACE for running cover for Don Lemon storming a church
&#8220;CONVENIENTLY missing from what you just showed, George, is the appellate court and a judge on the appellate court who said just… <a href="https://t.co/xXMd06A5hm">pic.twitter.com/xXMd06A5hm</a>
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) <a href="https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2017972800217059798?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 1, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;When do you believe that Mr. Lemon crossed the line from reporting what was going on to criminal activity?&#8221; Stephanopoulos asked.
&#8220;Conveniently missing from what you just showed, George, is the appellate court and a judge on the appellate court who said just a few days later there was clearly probable cause — and it wasn&#8217;t even a close question!&#8221; Blanche shot back.
&#8220;And by the way, a grand jury, which is what our system has set up to determine whether probable cause exists, concluded that there was probable cause!&#8221; he continued. &#8220;That indictment is now public. Everybody in this country can pull it up and read for themselves and see what the grand jury found that Mr. Lemon did. I am not going to comment on the charges specifically because that&#8217;s not appropriate.&#8221;
Blanche went on to talk about the protest as a whole, arguing that disrupting a church service and attempting to intimidate those who were just there to worship was a violation of their First Amendment rights to practice religion without being harassed while doing so.
&#8220;We talk about the First Amendment right. You have a right of freedom of religion, which is just as important as any other right that we have!&#8221; he explained. &#8220;And George, I don&#8217;t know if you&#8217;ve watched the videos or read the indictment about what it&#8217;s alleged that Mr. Lemon did, but if anybody in this country thinks that that is quote, independent journalism, I would like to have a conversation with you.&#8221;
Blanche concluded by saying that Lemon was certainly entitled to hire an attorney and raise any defense he saw fit, but that protesters should not be allowed to feel comfortable disrupting church services and intimidating those who had just come to worship.
President Donald Trump, aboard Air Force One on Saturday, minced no words when delivering his opinion of the former CNN anchor — but said that he had not known Lemon was going to be arrested.
&#8220;He’s a sleazebag! Everyone’s known that. He’s a washed up,&#8221; Trump said. &#8220;Probably from his standpoint, the best thing that could happen to him. He had no viewers. He was a failed host. And now, he’s in the news. I didn’t know anything about it.&#8221;

ABC Host And Top Trump Official Spar Over Don Lemon Arrest

George Stephanopoulos

This Week

While Winter Storm Fern blanketed much of the southeastern United States with snow — and, of course, ice — media outlets continued to foment panic over President Donald Trump&#8217;s use of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (the other kind of ICE) and Border Patrol in major cities like Minneapolis.
For those who don&#8217;t spend their Sunday mornings glued to the television — and their Sunday afternoons attempting to dig through a week&#8217;s worth of network and cable news media spin — The Daily Wire has compiled a short summary of what you may have missed.
Tensions ramped up over the weekend after a fatal shooting involving Border Patrol agents in Minneapolis, where federal immigration officials continue their efforts to apprehend and remove criminal illegal aliens. Sanctuary policies — promoted both by Mayor Jacob Frey and by failed vice presidential candidate and Governor Tim Walz (D-MN) — have left federal agents working not only without the coordination and cooperation of local law enforcement, but sometimes directly in opposition to them.
The end result is the impasse that made a surge of federal resources and personnel necessary in the first place: local officials claim that having federal agents in the streets make the people less safe, while federal officials maintain that if state and local police would honor ICE detainers and allow federal officers to apprehend criminal illegals in jails and courthouses, federal officers would not need to be on the streets.
By Sunday, the lines in the snow had been drawn and reinforced — and the legacy media outlets brought in Democrats (and a few Republicans) who would question the Trump administration, at least in light of the latest fatal confrontation.
ABC News anchor Jonathan Karl began his broadcast of &#8220;This Week&#8221; with a brief profile of Alex Pretti, 37, who was shot by Border Patrol agents — and quoted Pretti&#8217;s mother as saying, &#8220;He loved his country, but he hated what people were doing to it.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
“He loved his country, but he hated what people were doing to it,” Alex Pretti’s mother told the AP.
ABC News’ <a href="https://twitter.com/jonkarl?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@JonKarl</a> reports on what we know about the 37‑year‑old, who was shot and killed by federal agents Saturday in Minneapolis. <a href="https://t.co/nzQJ9tYzE4">pic.twitter.com/nzQJ9tYzE4</a>
— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ThisWeekABC/status/2015456870299742298?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 25, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Karl then brought in Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) — who is expected to jump into the gubernatorial race in the coming months — to discuss the situation. Klobuchar claimed she would have supported efforts to root out fraud and to apprehend the worst of the worst when it came to criminal illegal aliens — but she believed it was clear that was not what the Trump administration had been doing.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
“If your goal was to go after fraud, that’s a righteous goal. But that’s not what this is. If your goal was to apprehend violent offenders — good. But that’s not what you’re doing anymore.”
Sen. Klobuchar’s message to federal officials after escalating tensions in Minneapolis. <a href="https://t.co/FRz5VoRNvy">pic.twitter.com/FRz5VoRNvy</a>
— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ThisWeekABC/status/2015457301939802182?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 25, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Klobuchar addressed the Pretti shooting directly, saying that some Republicans had spoken to her quietly about their concerns regarding the actions of federal agents but that was not enough. &#8220;At this point, silence is complicity,&#8221; she said, claiming that federal agents were violating constitutional rights at every turn.
Klobuchar argued, among other things, that the agents cracking down on violent protests were violating First Amendment rights to assemble — and then claimed that Border Patrol agents were violating the Second Amendment because Pretti had been a legally-permitted gun-owner.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Sen. Amy Klobuchar criticizes her Republican colleagues who she says have not spoken about the federal actions in Minneapolis: “At this point, silence is complicity.” <a href="https://t.co/Q4LlxAFJW9">https://t.co/Q4LlxAFJW9</a> <a href="https://t.co/Jmda2AVYSx">pic.twitter.com/Jmda2AVYSx</a>
— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ThisWeekABC/status/2015466555245498871?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 25, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Karl wrapped up the broadcast by giving New York City&#8217;s democratic socialist Mayor Zohran Mamdani a chance to double down on his calls to defund ICE. &#8220;ICE is an organization that cares little for the rules. It&#8217;s an organization that operates with reckless impunity and seems to revel in the flouting of those kinds of rules. And that&#8217;s what gives people a real sense of fear,&#8221; Mamdani claimed.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
NYC Mayor Mamdani on his calls to abolish ICE: “ICE is an organization that cares little for the rules. It&#8217;s an organization that operates with reckless impunity and seems to revel in the flouting of those kinds of rules. And that&#8217;s what gives people a real sense of fear.” <a href="https://t.co/i3n9c6Np6N">pic.twitter.com/i3n9c6Np6N</a>
— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ThisWeekABC/status/2015483794371789101?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 25, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
On CBS News, &#8220;Face the Nation&#8221; host Margaret Brennan brought in Senator Angus King (I-ME) to discuss the surge of agents coming to his state in the same way they&#8217;d dispatched to Minnesota, and he drew a hard line: &#8220;I believe what we&#8217;re seeing is an attempt to intimidate the American people. Again, armed people with masks and telling people they can&#8217;t photograph what they are doing and intimidating protesters, that&#8217;s not American.&#8221;
King joined Democrats making noise about another possible government shutdown as he said that he couldn&#8217;t possibly vote for a bill that funded ICE.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Sen. Angus King (I-ME) says he “can&#8217;t vote for a bill that includes ICE funding in these circumstances, what they are doing in my state, what we saw yesterday in Minneapolis.”
“I believe what we&#8217;re seeing is an attempt to intimidate the American people,” King says. “Again, armed… <a href="https://t.co/ESbH4QMwzX">pic.twitter.com/ESbH4QMwzX</a>
— Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) <a href="https://twitter.com/FaceTheNation/status/2015470479973216473?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 25, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
King claimed that there was a way for federal authorities to enforce immigration law without &#8220;ransacking our cities and terrorizing our residents,&#8221; but he did not say how he expected that to happen while local and state authorities were refusing to cooperate with the feds – and while Democrat leaders were actively encouraging civilians to obstruct and push back on the federal agents attempting to do their jobs.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
When asked how the state and federal government can work together on immigration, Sen. Angus King (I-ME) says federal authorities “can enforce the laws against illegal immigration and people that are criminals without ransacking our cities and terrorizing our residents.”
“There… <a href="https://t.co/yH2uHNj1sf">pic.twitter.com/yH2uHNj1sf</a>
— Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) <a href="https://twitter.com/FaceTheNation/status/2015469864622731720?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 25, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Brennan also spoke with Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O&#8217;Hara, who suggested that the federal agents were going about things the wrong way.
&#8220;The Minneapolis Police Department went the entire year last year recovering about 900 guns from the street, arresting hundreds and hundreds of violent offenders, and we didn&#8217;t shoot anyone,&#8221; he claimed, but he failed to address the fact that the city was still awash in criminal illegal aliens that he and his department had done nothing about.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
After two U.S. citizens were killed by federal agents in Minneapolis in recent weeks, the city’s police chief, Brian O’Hara, says the people of Minneapolis “have had enough” of ICE’s Operation Metro Surge.
“The Minneapolis Police Department went the entire year last year… <a href="https://t.co/dX3DKVtHbe">pic.twitter.com/dX3DKVtHbe</a>
— Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) <a href="https://twitter.com/FaceTheNation/status/2015458221582852432?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 25, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
And on CNN, anchor Dana Bash discussed the situation with newly-elected Governor Mikie Sherrill (D-NJ). Asking Sherrill about the fact that her state was home to numerous &#8220;sanctuary&#8221; jurisdictions — and was likely to face surges of federal agents as well, Bash asked how she planned to handle such actions.
Sherrill&#8217;s response was to compare ICE to the communist STASI, East Germany&#8217;s brutal secret police.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Sherrill on ICE: &#8220;This is about a basically Stasi-type force of secret police that wear masks, that are unidentifiable, that are unaccountable, that have leadership in the Trump administration blatantly lying about what&#8217;s going on, when the American people can see the videos… <a href="https://t.co/oRnMsIUEDE">pic.twitter.com/oRnMsIUEDE</a>
— State of the Union (@CNNSOTU) <a href="https://twitter.com/CNNSOTU/status/2015475979393593555?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 25, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

ICE Protest

Spin Cycle: Forecast Calls For More Snow And ICE In Minneapolis

President Donald Trump has made no secret of his desire to acquire Greenland for the United States, and while his administration has insisted the goal is a negotiated purchase of the strategically-located island from Denmark, critics in the media and the Democratic Party have nonetheless suggested he will use the military to take the island by force.
For those who don&#8217;t spend their Sunday mornings glued to the television — and their Sunday afternoons attempting to dig through a week&#8217;s worth of network and cable news media spin — The Daily Wire has compiled a short summary of what you may have missed.
The renewed furor over Greenland began with a Saturday <a href="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/115911344443637897">Truth Social post</a> from the president leveraging tariffs against a number of European nations until an agreement is reached for the United States to purchase it.
&#8220;The United States of America is immediately open to negotiation with Denmark and/or any of these Countries that have put so much at risk, despite all that we have done for them, including maximum protection, over so many decades,&#8221; Trump said.
Following a week of military buildup in Greenland — as European nations attempt to help Denmark shore up defenses against a U.S. invasion that the Trump administration has repeatedly stated is not coming — anchors and guests across the legacy networks discussed the fate of the island nation as if an invasion was imminent.
Anchor Jonathan Karl raised the question with Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX) on ABC&#8217;s &#8220;This Week,&#8221; asking what he made of the president&#8217;s rhetoric regarding gaining control of Greenland.
&#8220;I want to put your foreign affairs hat on — what do you make of what&#8217;s going on with the president and Greenland? And how he&#8217;s slapped tariffs on eight of our allies in Europe? He&#8217;s not rolling out military force to get Greenland?&#8221; he asked, his tone almost one of disbelief.
McCaul quickly pointed out the fact that American presidents had considered Greenland to be a strategic purchase since the United States acquired Alaska, adding, &#8220;It is very strategic right now from a national security standpoint against China and Russia. But in 1951 we signed a treaty with Denmark that allows us full access to Greenland — to protect Greenland, and this was after World War II — President Truman initially was involved and then President Eisenhower.&#8221;
&#8220;The fact is, the president has full military access to Greenland to protect us from any threats,&#8221; McCaul added, noting that Trump could increase the American military presence in Greenland without the United States officially taking ownership of the territory. &#8220;If he wants to purchase Greenland, that&#8217;s one thing. But for him to militarily invade would turn Article 5 of NATO on its very head, in essence, put us at war with NATO itself.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
GOP Rep. Michael McCaul on President Trump’s proposed action in Greenland: “If we want to put more military in there, we can, we don&#8217;t have to invade it. If you want to buy it, that&#8217;s fine. But I don&#8217;t see a willing seller right now.&#8221; <a href="https://t.co/XjdJpMxs7P">https://t.co/XjdJpMxs7P</a> <a href="https://t.co/VuenM5BGQA">pic.twitter.com/VuenM5BGQA</a>
— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ThisWeekABC/status/2012910723244888229?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 18, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Karl also brought in Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) to discuss the situation, and he immediately accused the president of an attempted land grab with regard to Greenland.
&#8220;Donald Trump wants to get his hands on the minerals and other resources of Greenland, just like the real reason he went into Venezuela had nothing to do with stopping drugs from coming,&#8221; he claimed.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Sen. Chris Van Hollen calls President Trump’s pursuit of Greenland a “land grab.”
“Donald Trump wants to get his hands on the minerals and other resources of Greenland, just like the real reason he went into Venezuela had nothing to do with stopping drugs from coming.” <a href="https://t.co/c1JOw3UudA">pic.twitter.com/c1JOw3UudA</a>
— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ThisWeekABC/status/2012916694298079330?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 18, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Governor-elect Mikie Sherrill (D-NJ) also joined Karl on Sunday morning, and she argued that it would be unfair to the people of New Jersey for Trump to spend federal funds — some of which come out of her state — on a strategic purchase like Greenland.
&#8220;There is not one person in New Jersey that wakes up in the morning and says, ‘Gee, I hope today&#8217;s the day that the president dumps billions of dollars into buying Greenland,&#8221; she added.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
“There is not one person in New Jersey that wakes up in the morning and says, ‘Gee, I hope today&#8217;s the day that the president dumps billions of dollars into buying Greenland.”
NJ Governor-elect Mikie Sherrill criticizes President Trump’s use of federal funds. <a href="https://t.co/jWAURz3lDw">pic.twitter.com/jWAURz3lDw</a>
— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ThisWeekABC/status/2012931291994350023?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 18, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Senator Mark Warner (D-VA) threatened a vote on a bill that would prevent Trump from using federal funds to exert control over Greenland — and claimed that there was no threat to Greenland from Russia or China. Ignoring the fact that the Trump administration&#8217;s assertion is that the three is not to Greenland but to the United States – and that Greenland, protected solely by Denmark, is the weak link in the security chain — Warner claimed that the only actual threat to Greenland was coming from Donald Trump.
&#8220;There is no current security threat from Russia or China to Greenland. The only security threat to Greenland right now is the United States,&#8221; he told &#8220;Face the Nation&#8221; anchor Margaret Brennan on CBS News.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, says he would “of course” vote in support of a bill proposed by Sens. Shaheen and Murkowski that would prohibit the use of federal funds to assert control over the territory of a NATO state. But Warner tells… <a href="https://t.co/bzXWVgwf23">pic.twitter.com/bzXWVgwf23</a>
— Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) <a href="https://twitter.com/FaceTheNation/status/2012934974203199978?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 18, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Brennan also ran with a new CBS News poll that showed Americans were largely opposed to possible U.S. military action in Greenland, and worried that such action would likely &#8220;create more instability in the world.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
There’s widespread bipartisan opposition to the prospect of U.S. military action in Greenland, with many Americans saying the implications would create more instability in the world, a new CBS News poll finds. <a href="https://t.co/a6pikO0swy">https://t.co/a6pikO0swy</a> <a href="https://t.co/EnQZgoFnpP">pic.twitter.com/EnQZgoFnpP</a>
— Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) <a href="https://twitter.com/FaceTheNation/status/2012942648055566729?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 18, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
On CNN, anchor Jake Tapper brought in former Vice President Mike Pence to push back on Trump&#8217;s apparent plan. Pence argued that while it was perfectly reasonable to look at Greenland as a strategic objective, the issue was how President Trump might go about bringing Denmark to heel.
&#8220;Well, look, I think it&#8217;s a question right now, Jake, not of what the president&#8217;s trying to accomplish, but how? And I have concerns about using what I think is a questionable constitutional authority, imposing unilateral tariffs on NATO allies to achieve this objective,&#8221; he explained.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Former Vice President Mike Pence questions President Trump threatening new tariffs on allies over Greenland:
&#8220;Well, look, I think it&#8217;s a question right now, Jake, not of what the president&#8217;s trying to accomplish, but how? And I have concerns about using what I think is a… <a href="https://t.co/2MYQrcpZTb">pic.twitter.com/2MYQrcpZTb</a>
— State of the Union (@CNNSOTU) <a href="https://twitter.com/CNNSOTU/status/2012896195752968501?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 18, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Senator Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) rounded out the conversation with Tapper by complaining about the use of federal funds to gain a strategic foothold in the Arctic.
&#8220;The idea that we&#8217;re going to waste money for everything we want is the dumbest decision we can make. The only person who can make a decision this dumb is someone who could let a casino go under, and guess who is President right now?&#8221; he said.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Democratic Senator Ruben Gallego on Trump&#8217;s push to acquire Greenland:
&#8220;The idea that we&#8217;re going to waste money for everything we want is the dumbest decision we can make. The only person who can make a decision this dumb is someone who could let a casino go under, and guess… <a href="https://t.co/uubEY1KMMC">pic.twitter.com/uubEY1KMMC</a>
— State of the Union (@CNNSOTU) <a href="https://twitter.com/CNNSOTU/status/2012901242503127129?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 18, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-MD)

Spin Cycle: As Trump Escalates On Greenland, Media Speculates

Greenland

A shooting involving an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent and an anti-ICE activist Renee Good left the former injured and the latter dead. Despite evidence to the contrary provided in multiple videos — from several different angles — media outlets were quick to assist Democrats in their claims that the ICE agents were nothing more than aggressors, carrying out the whims of President Donald Trump.
For those who don&#8217;t spend their Sunday mornings glued to the television — and their Sunday afternoons attempting to dig through a week&#8217;s worth of network and cable news media spin — The Daily Wire has compiled a short summary of what you may have missed.
Even after videos emerged showing Good intentionally blocking federal agents with her car and taunting them — and then accelerating and striking the agent before he began firing his weapon — Democrats and the legacy media persisted in pushing several distinct narratives. While their coverage varied, the common thread was a simple one: the ICE agents had done something wrong.
ABC News anchor Martha Raddatz brought in Senator Tina Smith (D-MN) to discuss the situation, and Smith complained that the Department of Homeland Security had referred to Good&#8217;s behavior as &#8220;domestic terrorism&#8221; before details had been released. Of course, by the time Smith joined the broadcast, it had become apparent that Good was part of an anti-ICE activist group and had been trained to obstruct federal agents as they worked to enforce immigration law.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Minnesota Sen. Tina Smith criticizes the Trump administration’s response to the fatal shooting of Renee Good by an ICE officer: “They were calling her a domestic terrorist before they even knew what her name was.” <a href="https://t.co/kfto0xsFHL">https://t.co/kfto0xsFHL</a> <a href="https://t.co/EFdfteguUD">pic.twitter.com/EFdfteguUD</a>
— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ThisWeekABC/status/2010362541239574960?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 11, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Credit: @ThisWeekABC/X.com
Smith claimed the ICE agents suddenly snapped after a friendly exchange with protesters, arguing that better training would have prevented the incident.
&#8220;No professional law enforcement would exchange words or banter with somebody who is engaged in their legal right to protest and then lose control, which looks to me like what happened here,&#8221; she said.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Sen. Smith reacts to the new video of the moments leading to the shooting of Renee Good: “No professional law enforcement would exchange words or banter with somebody who is engaged in their legal right to protest and then lose control, which looks to me like what happened here.” <a href="https://t.co/Q9UTCVAASj">pic.twitter.com/Q9UTCVAASj</a>
— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ThisWeekABC/status/2010362945818005597?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 11, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Credit: @ThisWeekABC/X.com
Raddatz also spoke with former acting ICE Director John Sandweg about the shooting, asking how the landscape had changed in recent years. Marching straight through the door Raddatz had opened for him, Sandweg said that ICE had adopted new &#8220;tactics&#8221; — and that those tactics were the real reason agents were facing dramatic increases in assaults against them as well as confrontations that ended in violence.
&#8220;This is a new environment for ICE and it’s not one that’s part of their core mission,&#8221; he said, suggesting with no pushback from Raddatz that the ICE agents stepping outside of their &#8220;core mission&#8221; was the root cause of the problem.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Former acting ICE Director John Sandweg on how the shooting of Renee Good compares to what he has seen historically: “This is a new environment for ICE and it’s not one that’s part of their core mission.” <a href="https://t.co/zeciQhyQ95">https://t.co/zeciQhyQ95</a> <a href="https://t.co/5SKI8qfw7Q">pic.twitter.com/5SKI8qfw7Q</a>
— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ThisWeekABC/status/2010375127393780180?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 11, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Credit: @ThisWeekABC/X.com
On CBS News, &#8220;Face the Nation&#8221; anchor Margaret Brennan spoke with Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) about the shooting — and she too made the claim that the ICE agent in question had not been properly trained.
&#8220;Renee Nicole Good, as you hear her say, she&#8217;s not mad, she&#8217;s sitting in her car, peacefully waving cars to get by,&#8221; Omar said, leaving out the fact that Good had positioned her vehicle so that it created a choke point that would only let one car, moving slowly, to get around her. She then immediately identified the ICE officer as the aggressor, describing his actions as wholly unnecessary and suggesting that Good was attempting to flee the scene because he&#8217;d scared her.
&#8220;And then you see the other officer, who can clearly see the car is moving, move toward the front of the car, which if they are saying that he has ten years on service and is trained, he should know that you shouldn&#8217;t be trying to get in front of a moving car,&#8221; Omar claimed, despite multiple video angles that show the officer standing in front of the vehicle prior to Good&#8217;s acceleration.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) tells <a href="https://twitter.com/FaceTheNation?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@FaceTheNation</a> it is “not acceptable” for DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, President Trump and Vice President Vance to make judgements about the moments surrounding the shooting of Renee Macklin Good by an ICE agent in Minneapolis “without there being a… <a href="https://t.co/neMjx6SoET">pic.twitter.com/neMjx6SoET</a>
— Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) <a href="https://twitter.com/FaceTheNation/status/2010391818811134214?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 11, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Credit: @FaceTheNation/X.com
Although Brennan offered no challenge to Omar&#8217;s narrative — despite the video evidence that contradicted it — she did push back slightly when she asked whether it was reasonable to have citizens effectively stalking federal agents while they were attempting to do their jobs.
Omar insisted that it was &#8220;very important&#8221; for Americans to record ICE agents while they work &#8220;to create the level of accountability and transparency,&#8221; adding, &#8220;I think it is fair for citizens to document what law enforcement is doing in their communities.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), speaking to <a href="https://twitter.com/FaceTheNation?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@FaceTheNation</a>, says “it is really important for Americans to record” ICE agents “to create the level of accountability and transparency.”
Asked to clarify further, as the Trump administration claims its ICE officers are being stalked and… <a href="https://t.co/ahi8gEa0Jy">pic.twitter.com/ahi8gEa0Jy</a>
— Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) <a href="https://twitter.com/FaceTheNation/status/2010392392277332260?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 11, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Credit: @FaceTheNation/X.com
On CNN&#8217;s &#8220;State of the Union,&#8221; anchor Jake Tapper spoke with Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey (D), who claimed that the ICE presence in his city was not doing anything to help people.
&#8220;ICE and Kristi Noem and everything they&#8217;re doing is making [Minneapolis] far less safe,&#8221; he said, despite the growing list of violent offenders who have been apprehended in his city since the surge began.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
&#8220;That was some wild and crazy stuff.&#8221; Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey responds to Jake Tapper’s interview with Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, saying that, &#8220;ICE and Kristi Noem and everything they&#8217;re doing is making [Minneapolis] far less safe.&#8221; <a href="https://t.co/4d8vLWxpZY">pic.twitter.com/4d8vLWxpZY</a>
— State of the Union (@CNNSOTU) <a href="https://twitter.com/CNNSOTU/status/2010388954483454260?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 11, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Credit: @CNNSOTU/X.com
Frey took things a bit further, also attempting to spin Renee Good&#8217;s clearly intentional blockage of traffic as her simply not being very good at turning around. &#8220;(Renee Good) was doing a three or a four or five-point turn&#8230; if doing a three point turn or a four point turn is a domestic terrorist and my wife is a criminal every single day,&#8221; he said.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
MAYOR JACOB FREY: &#8220;(Renee Good) was doing a three or a four or five-point turn&#8230; if doing a three point turn or a four point turn is a domestic terrorist and my wife is a criminal every single day,&#8221;
Mayor Frey doesn&#8217;t know what a three-point turn is. 
🤡🌎 <a href="https://t.co/OfIm19O0PU">pic.twitter.com/OfIm19O0PU</a>
— Andrew @ Don’t Walk, RUN! (@DontWalkRUN) <a href="https://twitter.com/DontWalkRUN/status/2010377694937018486?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 11, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Credit: @Don&#8217;tWalkRUN/X.com

Shooting At Annunciation School Church In Minneapolis Leaves Multiple Children Dead And Many Injured

Spin Cycle: In Wake Of ICE Shooting, The Gaslights Are On — But Is Anyone Home?

Shooting

On Saturday, elite American military operators descended upon an indicted narco-terrorist and extracted him from Venezuela, delivering him to New York to face the charges. That indicted narco-terrorist just happened to be Nicolás Maduro, the dictator who calls himself &#8220;president.&#8221;
With Maduro gone, Democrats who once called for his ouster are suddenly up in arms, simply because President Donald Trump is the one who made it happen.
For those who don&#8217;t spend their Sunday mornings glued to the television — and their Sunday afternoons attempting to dig through a week&#8217;s worth of network and cable news media spin — The Daily Wire has compiled a short summary of what you may have missed.
Across the major legacy networks, Democrats complained about the fact that the Trump administration had sent military operators in to extract Maduro — and media personalities quickly joined them in questioning whether or not the Trump administration had the authority to take that action without first getting congressional approval.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer — who <a href="https://x.com/mazemoore/status/2007868827355484611">criticized Trump</a> in 2020 for not ending Maduro&#8217;s regime — led the charge on ABC&#8217;s &#8220;This Week,&#8221; speaking with Democratic strategist-turned-ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos, Schumer conceded that Maduro was a bad actor but claimed that the Trump administration had still been coloring outside the lines in going to get him.
&#8220;Look, Maduro is a horrible, horrible person,&#8221; Schumer said. &#8220;But you don&#8217;t treat lawlessness with other lawlessness. And that&#8217;s what&#8217;s happened here. The American people, this morning, are scratching their heads in wonderment and in fear of what the president has proposed: &#8216;The United States will run Venezuela.&#8217; We have learned through the years [that] when America tries to do regime change and nation-building in this way, the American people pay the price in both blood and dollars.&#8221;
Stephanopoulos pointed out the fact that Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the Trump administration had the authority to move on Maduro, and Schumer protested: &#8220;It&#8217;s a violation of the law to do what they did without getting the authorization of Congress.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer criticizes the U.S strike in Venezuela and capture of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro: “It&#8217;s a violation of the law to do what they did without getting the authorization of Congress.” <a href="https://t.co/jbZuHwZD9A">https://t.co/jbZuHwZD9A</a> <a href="https://t.co/nNEQWg1d7V">pic.twitter.com/nNEQWg1d7V</a>
— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ThisWeekABC/status/2007838874295287924?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 4, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
CBS News anchor Margaret Brennan brought in Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), who became a household name when he traveled to El Salvador to retrieve MS-13 gang member Kilmar Abrego Garcia. Van Hollen also complained that the Trump administration had overstepped its authority in taking action in Venezuela without asking Congress first.
He predicted that in reaction, Congress &#8220;will have a vote on a war powers resolution probably as early as this week, if not next.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Sen. Chris Van Hollen says President Trump does not have the legal authority to attack Venezuela and says he’s sure that Congress “will have a vote on a war powers resolution probably as early as this week, if not next.”
“For the most part, Republicans are happy to give Donald… <a href="https://t.co/J4kq7RraNC">pic.twitter.com/J4kq7RraNC</a>
— Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) <a href="https://twitter.com/FaceTheNation/status/2007863051152679414?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 4, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
On &#8220;The Sunday Briefing,&#8221; Senator Tim Kaine (D-VA) said much the same to Fox News host Jacqui Heinrich, after first claiming that more traditional avenues like sanctions hadn&#8217;t worked on Maduro because American allies hated Trump too much to join the United States in enforcing them. Then he, too, argued that Trump should have come to Congress for approval before sending military operators into Venezuela.
Kaine, as recently as 2024, had called Maduro an <a href="https://x.com/SenTimKaine/status/1836398711837974976">illegitimate leader</a> and demanded a &#8220;peaceful transfer of power.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
🚨 WOW. Democrat Sen. Tim Kaine just got UTTERLY EMBARRASSED on national television!
&#8220;If Dems cared SO MUCH about process, why didn&#8217;t THEY do anything to bring Maduro to justice when THEY were in charge? The guy&#8217;s been under indictment since 2020!&#8221; 🔥💯<a href="https://t.co/aoPkS0qMlC">pic.twitter.com/aoPkS0qMlC</a>
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) <a href="https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2007878745403912679?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 4, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
More of the same came from Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT), who <a href="https://x.com/TimMurtaugh/status/2007864277823107222">said in 2019</a> that Trump would move to topple Maduro because &#8220;getting rid of Maduro is good for the United States.&#8221;
On CNN&#8217;s &#8220;State of the Union,&#8221; however, he said Trump&#8217;s actions had been &#8220;wildly illegal&#8221; and claimed that he was only moving on Venezuela to gain control of natural resources for his own personal financial gain.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Sen. Chris Murphy tells Dana Bash that Trump’s attack on Venezuela “seems to be mostly about oil and natural resources” and is “all about making money for his friends.” <a href="https://t.co/EvylbRzl5B">pic.twitter.com/EvylbRzl5B</a>
— State of the Union (@CNNSOTU) <a href="https://twitter.com/CNNSOTU/status/2007847037501329477?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 4, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
But Rubio explained in several interviews on Sunday why the Trump administration had not asked Congress for permission to act — or even notified Congress prior to doing so — and why they hadn&#8217;t been bound to do so.
&#8220;This was not an action that required congressional approval. In fact, it couldn’t require congressional approval because this was not an invasion. This is not an extended military operation,&#8221; he told NBC News anchor Kristen Welker on &#8220;Meet the Press.&#8221;
&#8220;We will seek congressional approval for actions that require congressional approval. Otherwise, they’ll get congressional notification.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
&#8220;This was not an action that required congressional approval&#8230; This was not an invasion,&#8221; says <a href="https://twitter.com/SecRubio?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@SecRubio</a>.
&#8220;We will seek congressional approval for actions that require congressional approval. Otherwise, they&#8217;ll get congressional notification.&#8221; <a href="https://t.co/up6ZEJtmXd">pic.twitter.com/up6ZEJtmXd</a>
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) <a href="https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/2007831235091910730?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 4, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
On ABC&#8217;s &#8220;This Week,&#8221; he added, &#8220;You can&#8217;t congressionally notify something like this for two reasons. Number one, it will leak. It&#8217;s as simple as that. And number two, it&#8217;s an exigent circumstance,&#8221; Rubio explained.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Sec. Rubio responds to criticism of the lack of congressional authorization in the U.S. operation in Venezuela: “You can&#8217;t congressionally notify something like this for two reasons. Number one, it will leak. It&#8217;s as simple as that. And number two, it&#8217;s an exigent circumstance.” <a href="https://t.co/qIBPiRuDYk">pic.twitter.com/qIBPiRuDYk</a>
— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ThisWeekABC/status/2007837470977581424?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 4, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley addressed that point as well, responding specifically to the comments made by Tim Kaine, and argued that not only was the Trump administration&#8217;s action legal, it was no different than actions taken by previous Democratic presidents.
&#8220;Sen. Tim Kaine (D., Va) told Fox that &#8220;the Constitution does not give the President the right to initiate military action.&#8221; That is entirely incorrect. The Constitution does not give a president the right to declare war. However, presidents are allowed to use military forces without such a declaration&#8230;&#8221; <a href="https://x.com/JonathanTurley/status/2007884771209187539">Turley stated</a>, adding, &#8220;Democratic presidents routinely launched attacks in other countries without any objection from Sen. Kaine. Obama not only killed an American citizen not charge with any crime but attacked Libya&#8217;s capital and attacked its military to cause a regime change without consulting with Congress.&#8221;

Menu