“Saturday Night Live” mocked HBO’s upcoming “Harry Potter” television series over the weekend for race-swapping the villain, Severus Snape.
Paapa Essiedu, a black British actor, is set to play the role, a character described in J.K. Rowling&#8217;s books as having pale, yellow skin. 
During the &#8220;Weekend Update&#8221; segment on Saturday&#8217;s show, “SNL” cast member Kam Patterson portrayed a black version of Snape and joked about how the character might be perceived. 
“Good evening, Mr. Jost — nah, I’m playing. I don’t talk like that, bro. It’s called code-switching. Codio switchio!” Patterson said after being introduced by host Colin Jost.
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Weekend Update: Professor Snape Addresses New Spin on Harry Potter Role - SNL" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/JNaf-skJpzo?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Jost asked how things were going at Hogwarts, inspiring Patterson to reply, “Not great. We got this new kid. His name is Harry Potter, and he’s racist as hell. Harry Potter — or, the Proud Boy Who Lived — spent the whole year telling everybody that the school’s only black teacher was secretly evil.”
Jost interjected, “I think he’s just worried because he knows someone’s trying to steal the Sorcerer’s Stone.” 
“So somebody stole something, and the number one suspect is Black Snape? They didn’t even look at the white guy in the turban. So offensive. He’s got a wizard on the back of his head,” Patterson shot back.
“I’m really sorry that he just jumped to conclusions like that,” Jost said. 
Snape replied, “All good. It happens all the time. I showed up at Hogwarts, and on the first day, they looked at me and said, ‘You’re the professor of the Dark Arts.’ I never even studied that! I majored in African Muggle Studies.”
“The whole wizarding world is racist,” Patterson went on in the bit. “There’s one other black guy, Kingsley Shacklebolt, a name I’m guessing they got out of the Wu-Tang name generator … why they got to put ‘shackle’ in his name? That’s crazy, man. Shackle? Shackle!”
The skit went on, with a reference to Rowling being “problematic.”
Essiedu claimed that haters have been out in force since his casting for “Harry Potter” was announced. The British star <a href="https://www.thetimes.com/culture/tv-radio/article/paapa-essiedu-harry-potter-snape-interview-3hqkzzmlk">told</a> The Times last month that he’s been told, “Quit or I’ll murder you.”
“It really matters,” he says. “The reality is that if I look at Instagram I will see somebody saying, ‘I’m going to come to your house and kill you.’ …nobody should have to encounter this for doing their job. Many people put their lives on the line in their work. I’m playing a wizard in Harry Potter. And I’d be lying if I said it doesn’t affect me emotionally.”
“But the abuse fuels me,” he went on. “And makes me more passionate about making this character my own, because I think of how I felt as a kid. I would imagine myself at Hogwarts on broomsticks, and the idea that a kid like me can see themselves represented in that world? That’s motivation to not be intimidated by someone saying they’d rather I died instead of doing work I’m going to be really proud of.”

Paapa Essideu

SNL Wrecks New ‘Harry Potter’ Series For Racially Profiling Fan-Favorite

Entertainment

Harry Potter

Racism

Saturday Night Live

Television

HBO Max will commemorate the second anniversary of the Hamas October 7 terrorist attack on Israel by airing the scripted series, “One Day in October.”
The limited series is based on real accounts from the horrific attack in 2023, which resulted in the massacre of more than 1,200 Israelis and hundreds of others being taken hostage. It first premiered on Israeli network Yes Drama on the first anniversary of the coordinated raid.
The project is said to include “seven emotionally gripping and artistically interwoven narratives of love, courage, sacrifice, and survival. From families torn apart to moments of hope emerging in the face of unspeakable tragedy to incredible bravery against the odds, each episode reveals the human cost and resilience born out of chaos. The series portrays the victims’ and survivors’ experiences of that day and is brought to life by a distinguished cast and acclaimed creative team,” per <a href="https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-news/hbo-hamas-israel-one-day-in-october-7-series-1236372113/">The Hollywood Reporter</a>.
FOX Entertainment Studios President Fernando Szew said of the series, “The tragic events on October 7th had a profound impact on all of us. From the very beginning, we approached this series with the utmost care, sensitivity, and urgency to ensure that the stories were told with authenticity and respect, and paying homage to the victims and the heroic survivors.” 
Szew added that the creators “have truly created compelling storytelling that we are proud to showcase.”
“For me, film and television have always been more than entertainment, they are a way to bear witness. These are stories of ordinary people facing extraordinary moments,” Daniel Finkelman, founder of the production company Sparks Go, said. “In a time when truth is fragile, the most powerful thing we can do is to appeal to humanity itself. My hope is that these stories will open hearts and spark meaningful conversation.”
Last year, Finkelman discussed what compelled him to make the series. 
“After Oct. 7, I realized that when you know what you are willing to die for, you know what you are ready to live for,” he <a href="https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/culture/article-822942">said</a>, per The Jerusalem Post. “I realized what we are fighting for.”
“We’re being shown real footage on the news of people being abducted and no one gives a f***,” the producer added. “So we thought, let’s tell the narrative the way people like to be entertained.”
The cast includes actors Swell Ariel Or, Noa Kedar, Naomi Levov, Hisham Sulliman, Wael Hamdun, and Yuval Semo.

HBO Max Announces Series Dramatizing Hamas’s Oct. 7 Terror Attack On Israel

Hamas

Israel

October 7

World

The internet does not have high hopes for Larry David’s newly announced project, a sketch comedy show about American history produced by the Obamas.
Variety <a href="https://variety.com/2025/tv/news/larry-david-american-history-sketch-comedy-series-hbo-1236451946/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a> that David will co-write the new HBO program with Jeff Schaffer, with whom he worked on the long-running comedy show “Curb Your Enthusiasm.” David will star in and co-write the six-part series, the outlet noted.
Barack and Michelle Obama are set to executive produce the project through their Higher Ground Productions company.
The show’s description says, “President and Mrs. Obama wanted to honor America’s 250th anniversary and celebrate the unique history of our nation on this special occasion…But then Larry David called.”
Former President Obama commented on the pairing, saying, “I’ve sat across the table from some of the world’s most difficult leaders and wrestled with some of our most intractable problems. Nothing has prepared me for working with Larry David.”
Social media mainly had negative reactions to the news of David and the Obamas teaming up.
“It sounds like it’s gonna be one big lecture. I hope I’m wrong,” one account <a href="https://x.com/EricBalchunas/status/1943381813772325127">predicted</a>.
“Played out. Preaching to the choir. We don&#8217;t need more lectures from Hollywood,” another <a href="https://x.com/AwardsDaily/status/1943367269498917054">wrote</a>.
“This is going to be so awful,” a third commenter on X <a href="https://x.com/imjaredz/status/1943396360692097354">predicted</a>.
“Get ready for the most unfunny experience of your life,” another <a href="https://x.com/EliseMcCue/status/1943494127145955393">replied</a>.
“Trash propaganda I’m sure,” said another, while someone else just wrote, “Yikes.” 
David has been vocal about political issues and recently had a meltdown over Bill Maher having dinner with President Donald Trump. He was so incensed that the comedian penned an op-ed for The New York Times, repeating the tired trope that Trump was literally Hitler. 
CNN Republican Scott Jennings blasted David for publishing the op-ed, saying it was just another example of Democrats attacking anyone who tried to open the lines of communication between people with differing opinions.
“This is the modern Left,” Jennings <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/cnn-republican-torches-larry-davids-dinner-with-hitler-column-attacking-bill-maher">said</a>. “It’s an attempt always to intimidate people into not ever doing it again. It’s to silence yourselves, or we’ll do it for you. That’s the purpose of this op-ed, so that the next comedian, or the next person on the American left chooses not to speak to Donald Trump.&#8221;

Larry David

‘Yikes’: Larry David Teams Up With The Obamas For New American History Comedy Series

Barack Obama

Comedy

Michelle Obama

Politics

The three main characters for the HBO television adaptation of “Harry Potter” have been announced, and comments were shut off on social media, presumably to protect the young actors.
Per <a href="https://variety.com/2025/tv/news/harry-potter-hbo-series-casts-harry-ron-hermione-1236410755/">Variety</a>, Dominic McLaughlin was cast in the lead role of Harry Potter, Arabella Stanton will play Hermione Granger, and Alastair Stout will play Ron Weasley. The outlet noted that more than 30,000 actors auditioned for the three parts.
<blockquote class="instagram-media" style="background: #FFF; border: 0; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: 0 0 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.5),0 1px 10px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.15); margin: 1px; max-width: 540px; min-width: 326px; padding: 0; width: calc(100% - 2px);" data-instgrm-captioned="" data-instgrm-permalink="https://www.instagram.com/p/DKKUfgNguto/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" data-instgrm-version="14">
<div style="padding: 16px;">
&nbsp;
<div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; align-items: center;">
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 40px; margin-right: 14px; width: 40px;"></div>
<div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center;">
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 100px;"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 60px;"></div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="padding: 19% 0;"></div>
<div style="display: block; height: 50px; margin: 0 auto 12px; width: 50px;"></div>
<div style="padding-top: 8px;">
<div style="color: #3897f0; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: 550; line-height: 18px;">View this post on Instagram</div>
</div>
<div style="padding: 12.5% 0;"></div>
<div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; margin-bottom: 14px; align-items: center;">
<div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(0px) translateY(7px);"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; height: 12.5px; transform: rotate(-45deg) translateX(3px) translateY(1px); width: 12.5px; flex-grow: 0; margin-right: 14px; margin-left: 2px;"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(9px) translateY(-18px);"></div>
</div>
<div style="margin-left: 8px;">
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 20px; width: 20px;"></div>
<div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 2px solid transparent; border-left: 6px solid #f4f4f4; border-bottom: 2px solid transparent; transform: translateX(16px) translateY(-4px) rotate(30deg);"></div>
</div>
<div style="margin-left: auto;">
<div style="width: 0px; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-right: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(16px);"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; flex-grow: 0; height: 12px; width: 16px; transform: translateY(-4px);"></div>
<div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-left: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(-4px) translateX(8px);"></div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center; margin-bottom: 24px;">
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 224px;"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 144px;"></div>
</div>
&nbsp;
<p style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 17px; margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 8px; overflow: hidden; padding: 8px 0 7px; text-align: center; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 17px; text-decoration: none;" href="https://www.instagram.com/p/DKKUfgNguto/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" target="_blank" rel="noopener">A post shared by Max (@streamonmax)</a>
</div>
</blockquote>
<script async src="//www.instagram.com/embed.js"></script>
“After an extraordinary search led by casting directors Lucy Bevan and Emily Brockmann, we are delighted to announce we have found our Harry, Hermione and Ron. The talent of these three unique actors is wonderful to behold, and we cannot wait for the world to witness their magic together onscreen. We would like to thank all the tens of thousands of children who auditioned. It’s been a real pleasure to discover the plethora of young talent out there,” showrunner Francesca Gardiner and executive producer and director Mark Mylod said in a joint statement.
The actors are relatively unknown in the industry, but if their trajectory is anything like the original stars from the “Harry Potter” film series, these roles could turn them into household names. Daniel Radcliffe, who played the original Harry, along with Rupert Grint and Emma Watson, who played Ron and Hermione respectively, went on to have successful post-&#8220;Potter&#8221; careers.
McLaughlin is credited with appearing in “Grow,” an upcoming comedy. Stanton starred as Matilda in “Matilda: The Musical” for one year on the London theater circuit. Stout, meanwhile, has not had a major role yet.
Other confirmed stars for the highly anticipated TV series include John Lithgow as Albus Dumbledore, Janet McTeer as Minerva McGonagall, Paapa Essiedu as Severus Snape, and Nick Frost as Rubeus Hagrid. Luke Thallon will also take on the recurring role of Quirinus Quirrell, while Paul Whitehouse is set to play the recurring role of Argus Filch, The Daily Wire previously <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hbo-confirms-harry-potter-tv-series-casting-for-dumbledore-snape-and-hagrid">reported</a>.
According to the show’s logline, the series will be “a faithful adaptation of the beloved ‘Harry Potter’ book series by author and executive producer J.K. Rowling.”
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial&amp;utm_campaign=memorial&amp;utm_content=editorialmemorialday" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Get 40% Off New DailyWire+ Annual Memberships</a>
“The series will feature a new cast to lead a new generation of fandom, full of the fantastic detail and much-loved characters ‘Harry Potter’ fans have loved for over twenty-five years,” it says. “Each season will bring ‘Harry Potter’ and these incredible adventures to new audiences around the world, while the original, classic and cherished films will remain at the core of the franchise and available to watch globally.”
HBO execs previously voiced support for “Harry Potter” author Rowling and defended their decision to keep her on as executive producer despite the backlash she’s received from leftists. The billionaire author has been labeled a “TERF” (trans-exclusionary radical feminist) for rejecting radical gender theory.
“J.K. is an executive producer, and her insights will be helpful,” Casey Bloys, chairman and CEO of HBO and Max Content, previously said. “We are in the Harry Potter business.”
“J.K. is a very online conversation … It’s very nuanced and complicated and not something we’re going to get into,” he added. “Our priority is what’s onscreen. The Harry Potter story is incredibly affirmative and positive about love and acceptance, and that’s our priority, what’s on the screen.”
Filming for the TV series is slated for later this summer.

Harry Potter cast

‘Harry Potter’ TV Series Casts Three Main Characters

'Harry Potter' TV Series Casts Three Main Characters

U.S.

Two years after a major rebrand, the streaming service “Max” will revert back to being called “HBO Max,” reflecting what many customers were still calling it informally.
This announcement comes less than two months after Max debuted a logo tweak with a black and white design similar to the classic HBO logo with that same color scheme, per <a href="https://variety.com/2025/tv/news/max-changes-name-hbo-max-1236397399/">Variety</a>.
Parent company Warner Bros. Discovery announced the name change in a press release, the outlet noted, saying they are “returning the HBO brand into HBO Max will further drive the service forward and amplify the uniqueness that subscribers can expect from the offering. It is also a testament to WBD’s willingness to keep boldly iterating its strategy and approach — leaning heavily on consumer data and insights — to best position itself for success.”
“The powerful growth we have seen in our global streaming service is built around the quality of our programming,” WBD president and CEO David Zaslav told ad execs during a presentation on Wednesday. “Today, we are bringing back HBO, the brand that represents the highest quality in media, to further accelerate that growth in the years ahead.”
The outlet noted that the Max/HBO branding was originally changed in an effort to reflect the large variety of content, which was meant to make the service comparable to Netflix. Another speaker assured the crowd that the diversity of options would remain even though the name is changing back.
“We will continue to focus on what makes us unique — not everything for everyone in a household, but something distinct and great for adults and families. It’s really not subjective, not even controversial — our programming just hits different,” said JB Perrette, president and CEO of streaming.
The Max social media account changed its X bio to say, “These rebrands are trying to murder me.” 
The person in charge of social media also posted multiple memes about the switch, including the classic image of multiple identical Superman characters encountering one another.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
V2 approved by legal. <a href="https://t.co/uUhH3RU4T6">pic.twitter.com/uUhH3RU4T6</a>
&mdash; Max (@StreamOnMax) <a href="https://twitter.com/StreamOnMax/status/1922665329332748347?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 14, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
There was also a papal conclave joke showing an image of a chimney spewing white smoke.
“BREAKING: White smoke was seen coming from the Warner Bros. water tower. A new brand has been chosen,” the caption said. 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
BREAKING: White smoke was seen coming from the Warner Bros. water tower. A new brand has been chosen. <a href="https://t.co/DOC8LIWR4x">pic.twitter.com/DOC8LIWR4x</a>
&mdash; Max (@StreamOnMax) <a href="https://twitter.com/StreamOnMax/status/1922662280367333410?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 14, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
One user summed up what most everyone was saying, posting a comment that <a href="https://x.com/Anna_Niezgodzka/status/1922713229534363973">said</a>, “Seriously, just make up your mind. We still call it HBO no matter what.”

HBO Max

‘Max’ Streaming Service Adds ‘HBO’ Back To Its Name 2 Years After Rebranding

'Max' Streaming Service Adds 'HBO' Back To Its Name 2 Years After Rebranding

The popular HBO drama “The Last of Us” has been getting a lot of negative attention since Sunday night’s episode, in which one of the main female characters announced she was going to be a “dad.”
In the fourth episode of the second season, Ellie (Bella Ramsey) learns that her love interest Dina (Isabella Merced), who is portrayed as bisexual, is three months pregnant. After Dina reveals the news, Bella responds,  “So we’re having a baby… I mean, we and also I guess Jesse — it was Jesse, right?”
“So we’re all having a baby,” Ellie continued. “Holy sh**. I’m gonna be a dad.”
At another point in the episode, the two characters arrive in Seattle and ponder remnants of gay pride amongst the post-apocalyptic background, including pride flags and a giant rainbow mural. 
The reviews for this season, which saw the death of main character Joel (Pedro Pascal), have been mixed, and not just because of woke moments. Some have accused viewers of “review bombing” the show on various websites, but many critics are just underwhelmed by the pacing, character development, and straying from the storyline of the video game upon which the series is based.
&#8220;It&#8217;s the usual bait and switch. Season 1 was fantastic. Season 2 was all over within the first 10 mins. Woke bs from the start with Pascal going to therapy, females being more male than any of the men and the push for refugee rights. When are they going to stop pushing political agendas and write decent stories again?&#8221; one person <a href="https://www.metacritic.com/tv/the-last-of-us/season-2/">observed</a> on Metacritic. 
&#8220;The first season was good, and I can&#8217;t say the same for this season,” a second person agreed. “This is all teen drama with revenge plot, it&#8217;s so boring that I can&#8217;t turn off my brain to try to watch another episode. Killing off a beloved character for cheap reason is the final nail. This could be a good series but they clearly ruined it with bad writing. And don&#8217;t get me start on the agenda they try so hard to push but fail miserably.&#8221;
While fans say it made sense to make Ellie gay in the show to match the game, they say the showrunners&#8217; approach to the character is off the mark.
“I think people are missing that the way the show is going about this is not normal. At least in the game? Ellie being a lesbian wasn’t shoved in your face. It was natural. Like, ‘oh, she’s a lesbian? Okay. She’s still cool.’ But the show has Ellie being played by someone who looks nothing like her, even though they had options of actresses who did,” one X user <a href="https://x.com/BumpyBeatz/status/1920269455189516556">wrote</a>. 
“They consistently show Ellie being a judo bad*** when that’s not what she is? She’s a survivor. Even in the game? The melee animations show that she struggles and fights desperately. And now this? ‘Ima be a dad.’ This ain’t it. Just more ammo to be used against woke culture.”
Ramsey, 21, identifies as &#8220;non-binary&#8221; in real life, but has <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/non-binary-actress-bella-ramsey-said-its-important-to-keep-gendered-awards-categories">said</a> she supports gendered categories for awards shows despite feeling it’s “not quite” right for her to be nominated for Best Actress.

Bella Ramsey

HBO’s ‘The Last Of Us’ Trashed For Going Woke, Female Character Says She’s ‘Gonna Be A Dad’

HBO's 'The Last Of Us' Trashed For Going Woke, Female Character Says She's 'Going To Be A Dad'

Wokeness

“Saturday Night Live” issued an apology for a skit the show did making fun of “The White Lotus” actress Aimee Lou Wood’s teeth, which have been a constant topic of conversation since season 3 of the popular HBO series debuted.
“SNL” addressed the issue during a skit called “The White Potus,” which was mostly making fun of their constant target, President Donald Trump. During one scene, actress Sarah Sherman was meant to portray Wood’s character on the show. Host Jon Hamm, playing Robert F. Kennedy Jr., asks what would happen to people’s teeth if he took all the fluoride out of the drinking water. 
The camera then pans to cast member Sherman, who is wearing exaggerated prosthetic gapped teeth, and replies, “Fluoride? What’s that?”
<iframe loading="lazy" title="The White Potus - SNL" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/o_1GzmjOvKQ?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Wood later addressed the skit, saying in Instagram Stories that she found the skit “mean and unfunny.” 
In another post, the actress claimed she’s “not thin-skinned” and doesn’t mind jokes at her expense if they’re “clever and in good spirits.” But she said the joke about fluoride wasn’t that. 
“I have big gap teeth, not bad teeth,” the British star added.
Wood also insisted that most of that “SNL&#8221; skit was “punching up” because it involved mocking President Trump, his political advisers, and his family. She complained that only the joke about her was an example of being “punched down,” as reported by <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/aimee-lou-wood-white-lotus-snl-skit-teeth-experts_l_67fd35bfe4b09c14eff55690">HuffPost</a>.
On Tuesday, Wood posted a <a href="https://nypost.com/2025/04/16/entertainment/snl-hasnt-formally-apologized-to-aimee-lou-wood-for-white-lotus-parody/">photo of flowers</a> that Sherman allegedly sent her as a means of apologizing.
Reviews on the skit were mixed. Walton Goggins, who played Chelsea’s love interest, Rick, on “The White Lotus, reacted to the skit with a now-deleted comment that just said, “SMASHING.” Rumors have been circulating that he and Wood were not getting along.
Wood also mentioned in Stories that “SNL” has sent “apologies&#8221; to her, but a new <a href="https://www.tmz.com/2025/04/15/snl-aimee-lou-wood-no-formal-apology-white-lotus-parody-teeth/">report</a> from TMZ refutes that claim. Their insider said no formal apology has been made, even if individuals from the cast may have apologized.
The flowers and apologies come after photos of Wood crying in public while walking down the street with “House of the Dragon” actor Ralph Davis were posted Monday.
Wood later claimed she wasn’t &#8220;crying&#8221; about the “SNL” drama.
One fan wrote of the images, “Shame on SNL for their cruelty,” inspiring Wood to reply, “Thank you so much. Just to say, I actually wasn’t crying about anything that the papers made out &#8230; I was crying about something completely unrelated.”

Sarah Sherman

‘SNL’ Star Sends Flowers To ‘White Lotus’ Actress After Mocking Her Teeth In Skit

'SNL' Star Sends Flowers To 'White Lotus' Actress After Mocking Her Teeth In Skit

Celebrities

Several actors cast in the highly anticipated “Harry Potter” television series coming to HBO have just been announced.
Confirmed stars so far <a href="https://press.wbd.com/us/media-release/hbo-0/hbo-original-harry-potter-series-casts-john-lithgow-janet-mcteer-paapa-essiedu-nick">include</a> John Lithgow as Albus Dumbledore, Janet McTeer as Minerva McGonagall, Paapa Essiedu as Severus Snape, and Nick Frost as Rubeus Hagrid. Luke Thallon will also take on the recurring role of Quirinus Quirrell, while Paul Whitehouse is set to play the recurring role of Argus Filch.
“We are happy to announce the casting of John Lithgow, Janet McTeer, Paapa Essiedu, Nick Frost, Luke Thallon and Paul Whitehouse to play Dumbledore, McGonagall, Snape, Hagrid, Quirrell and Filch,” showrunner and executive producer Francesca Gardiner and executive producer Mark Mylod said in a statement. “We’re delighted to have such extraordinary talent onboard, and we can’t wait to see them bring these beloved characters to new life.”
The main roles of Harry, Ron, and Hermione have yet to be announced. Variety <a href="https://variety.com/2025/tv/news/harry-potter-hbo-series-dumbledore-snape-mcgonagall-hagrid-1236368778/">noted</a> that HBO hosted open auditions for the part and received more than 30,000 submissions. 
According to the show&#8217;s logline, the series will be “a faithful adaptation of the beloved ‘Harry Potter’ book series by author and executive producer J.K. Rowling.”
“The series will feature a new cast to lead a new generation of fandom, full of the fantastic detail and much-loved characters ‘Harry Potter’ fans have loved for over twenty-five years,” it says. “Each season will bring ‘Harry Potter’ and these incredible adventures to new audiences around the world, while the original, classic and cherished films will remain at the core of the franchise and available to watch globally.”
HBO execs previously voiced support for “Harry Potter” author J.K. Rowling and defended their decision to keep her on as executive producer despite the backlash she’s gotten from leftists. The billionaire author has been labeled a “TERF” (trans-exclusionary radical feminist) for rejecting radical gender theory.
“J.K. is an executive producer, and her insights will be helpful,” Casey Bloys, chairman and CEO of HBO and Max Content said in 2023, as The Daily Wire previously reported. “We are in the Harry Potter business.”
“J.K. is a very online conversation … It’s very nuanced and complicated and not something we’re going to get into,” said Bloys. “Our priority is what’s onscreen. The Harry Potter story is incredibly affirmative and positive about love and acceptance, and that’s our priority, what’s on the screen.”
Filming on the TV series is slated to begin this summer.

John Lithgow

HBO Confirms ‘Harry Potter’ TV Series Casting For Dumbledore, Snape, And Hagrid

HBO Confirms 'Harry Potter' TV Series Casting For Dumbledore, Snape, And Hagrid

J.K. Rowling

Somehow, John Oliver from HBO — who did an entire monologue this week about why men who want to play with ladies in sports should be allowed to do so — still has a show.
I don&#8217;t know why we gave him citizenship. I don&#8217;t know what he added to the country except for being obnoxiously smarmy with a British accent.
The other night he delivered one of the <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flSS1tjoxf0" target="_blank" rel="noopener">dumbest monologues</a> I&#8217;ve ever heard.
John Oliver is so trapped inside the Left-wing echo chamber that he actually believes it&#8217;s necessary for him to defend the idea that men should punch women in a boxing ring, that “trans athletes” must be allowed to play with members of the opposite biological sex.
In order to make this claim, he somehow has to square the circle of pretending that men playing with women is not unfair to the women, which means he now has to pretend that men are not better at sports than women.
He bloviated:
<blockquote>When it comes to trans athletes who&#8217;ve medically transitioned, studies of cis athletes are not necessarily relevant. A lot of medical, gender-affirming treatments like hormone therapy have a meaningful impact on body and hormone composition. So the question then becomes, what do those impacts mean for athletic performance? We spoke to scientists on all sides of this issue, and the one thing they actually agree on is that, in part, because the number of trans athletes is so small, the body of research specifically about them is extremely limited.</blockquote>
This is amazing. He is essentially saying, “We can&#8217;t look at studies that say that men are stronger than women because we&#8217;re now talking about men who have had a bunch of hormone treatments. So we don&#8217;t know. And so we have to look at the studies of men who have had hormones. But there are no studies. Therefore, men who have hormone treatments don&#8217;t have any sort of excess abilities over women. Therefore, they should be allowed to play with women.”
This is a classic in the genre of &#8220;absence of evidence does not equal evidence of absence.&#8221; In other words, absence of evidence that men with hormone treatments have an advantage over women does not mean evidence of absence of that advantage.
This is a classic logical fallacy in which he is engaging: “We can&#8217;t look at these studies that say that men are stronger than women, we have to look at the non-existent studies. But those studies don&#8217;t exist, and therefore men don&#8217;t have an advantage over women.”
That is not how logic works. 
He continued: 
<blockquote>There are a bunch of studies comparing specific anatomical features like muscle mass in women who transition but which don&#8217;t directly speak to their impact on athletic performance. But we were only able to find 12 studies that actually tested trans adult women&#8217;s physical fitness in a lab or other performance scenario. Eight have a sample size of less than 20. And two are the single athlete. And look, I don&#8217;t have any scientific experience, even though I look like a cross between a scientist and the profoundly sick mice he&#8217;s studying. But you probably shouldn&#8217;t draw broad conclusions of a sample size of one. Those 12 studies generally find that medically transitioning does impact trans women&#8217;s performance, but disagree on how or by how much.</blockquote>
This is hilarious. He&#8217;s laying out a bunch of studies that don&#8217;t support his own position, but then he&#8217;s dismissing the studies because the sample size is too small. So he&#8217;s literally cited zero evidence for his proposition so far, and somehow he&#8217;s going to magically transform that into the idea that men playing against women is somehow fair. 
He continued:
<blockquote>That research you saw earlier actually published the only longitudinal study to date of multiple athletes studying the impact of transitioning on eight long-distance runners. She found after at least a year on hormone therapy their race times turned out to be more athletically, similar to those of cisgender women than cisgender men. But she herself will tell you the study was limited and its conclusions were nuanced. Here she is explaining what we do and don&#8217;t know at this point: “It is undoubtedly true that trans women will maintain advantages in some sports, probably not so much in endurance sports, but in size and strength sports. Trans women will also have some physiological disadvantages. Our larger frames are now being powered by reduced muscle mass and reduced aerobic capacity, and that can lead to disadvantages in terms of like quickness, recovery, endurance, things that maybe aren&#8217;t quite as obvious as being bigger and stronger” Right. Bigger and stronger bodies are not automatically advantaged in every scenario.  </blockquote>
He still provided no evidence to the proposition that it&#8217;s fair for men to play with the ladies. We should point out that the expert he is citing is a former man, a person named Joanna Harper. Joanna Harper transitioned to female in 2004-2005. Joanna Harper is in his 60s and he cites his proudest athletic achievement as running 2:23 marathon as a young man. And that&#8217;s the person who&#8217;s being cited as the unbiased source on trans athletes in opposite sex sports.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/bss-ep-2177-member-exclusive?elementPosition=0&amp;row=0&amp;rowHeadline=The+Ben+Shapiro+Show&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Carousel" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h3>
Does this lead Oliver anywhere? Nope.
He continues to argue, based on no evidence, that it&#8217;s totally fair for men to play with the ladies, because he says so. After having come up with zero evidence for the proposition that it&#8217;s fair for men to play with the women, he then says it shouldn&#8217;t be an issue anyway, because no man is transitioning just to play with the women. 
That’s weird because there actually are a bunch of men who are transitioning and playing with the women. Not that they wouldn&#8217;t do hormone treatments and surgery in the absence of playing athletics, but — they seem to really want to play with the ladies. They could continue to race with the men, but they would lose.
You don&#8217;t see a lot of women who are transitioning into “men” who are desperate to play with the men. You don&#8217;t see a lot of women who say, “I&#8217;m cutting off my breasts and I&#8217;m having a fake penis attached and now I want to box the men.” It never happens. I wonder why?
Then John Oliver moved away from his zero evidence to this proposition: Why are you even noticing? Why do you even care? Sure, there are people doing this, but they&#8217;re not doing it because they want to beat up on the women. What does that matter to the women? Why should the women care about the motivation for why a gigantic man like Lia Thomas is now racing against Riley Gaines?
Why should Riley Gaines care what the motivation is? I’ll tell this clown why: She now has to race against a dude who was a low-ranked male swimmer but blows the other women out of the water because he’s a dude. 
<blockquote>The thing is, hypotheticals like that, circulate constantly and often center around someone transitioning solely to gain a competitive advantage. But as this trans researcher points out, that is an absurd proposition. </blockquote>
He then showed Harper stating, “Trans women don&#8217;t transition for sports. No one has ever said, &#8216;Yeah, I think I&#8217;d like to be a woman so I can do well in women&#8217;s sports.’ When you go through a gender transition, you lose so many things in life. My own mother said she never wanted to speak to me again. You know, I lost friends, family got divorced. You&#8217;d go through all of that just to win a medal in sports? No. Trans people transition because it&#8217;s the only way that we can live happily.” 
Oliver replied:
<blockquote>Right. No one says I&#8217;m going to transition just for the sake of sports. The same way no one says, “Could you please send me more messages about two factor authentication?&#8221; Or “when I walk down the aisle, I&#8217;d like a solo violin cover of Bawitdaba by Kid Rock.” That is just a made-up person. </blockquote>
Who cares? Who cares about the motivation of the person who wants to play with the ladies? You can have two different motivations, a motivation to add some fake boobs and cut off your penis, and a very different motivation: wanting to play with the ladies now that you are bigger and stronger than all the ladies. It doesn&#8217;t have to be the same motivation.
He&#8217;s silly and reductive. “Silly and Reductive” should be the name of John Oliver’s show. 
<blockquote>The underlying premise of that question from the world&#8217;s most famous sports cheater that those assigned male at birth are automatically going to have certain immutable physical advantages, that gets raised constantly, which is why we&#8217;re going to spend most of our time talking about trans women and girls, even though in these five states (Alabama, Missouri, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas) these bans impact trans boys in schools, too. 
It is obviously true that on average cisgender men and post-pubescent boys have some specific athletic performance advantages, though the relative size of that advantage also depends on the sport and the event in swimming. For instance, my life size and performance advantage is roughly 13% in the 50 meter freestyle, but less than 6% in the 1500 meter free, which is still clearly significant but in general, there’s a lot of overlap in the average performance ranges of men and women.
Basically, it is not the case that any man is going to be stronger or more athletic than every woman, which is sometimes what gets implied here. </blockquote>
That wasn&#8217;t the argument. What gets implied is that if you are looking at the ends of the bell curve — which is where top athletic performance happens, the end of bell curve, not the average — if you have men who have transitioned into women at the end of the bell curve, they are almost always going to outcompete women because they&#8217;re at the end of the bell curve.
By the way, you can make this dumb argument about anything. Why should we have age ranges in sports? Seriously. Why not have a bunch of 12-year-old Little Leaguers play the Major Leaguers in baseball? Every so often you might have a 12-year-old who is huge, a gigantic 12-year-old kid who can actually hit the ball. 
What the hell, if the bell curves overlap at all, then probably we should just get rid of the categories entirely.
We should do this with everything. It makes perfect sense to Oliver.
Or maybe what Oliver is saying is just stupid.
He got mad at House Speaker Mike Johnson because he cited Scripture to the effect that men and women exist.
You don&#8217;t have to quote Scripture that men and women exist to know it, but Scripture does say it, and Scripture has a much better record than John Oliver and his stupid glasses.
Oliver mocked the Bible, saying:
<blockquote>It is not just about denying trans women the right to play. It&#8217;s about denying them the right to exist. Mike Johnson basically said as much of the House passed its ban on trans athletes when he said this. We know from Scripture and from nature that men are men and women are women, and men cannot become women. That&#8217;s right, Mike. As Scripture tells us, man are man and women are women and God is his own son and some mothers are virgins and some mothers-in-law are pillars of salt, and some daughters are sex partners and colorful coats are dream-tellers and brothers are murderers, but also brothers are back-up husbands for wives and babies can be for splitting in half and water is wine &#8230; </blockquote>
You’ll notice that he completely elided Speaker Johnson&#8217;s statement adding “and Nature.” Johnson’s saying, “For those who believe in the Bible, Bible, the Bible says this, and for those who don&#8217;t, there&#8217;s a thing called Nature,” which Oliver is ignoring.
But then he does get to dunk with his peculiarly simplistic read on the Bible, which I&#8217;m sure has made him a very happy person, deliberately misinterpreting Biblical scripture and religious beliefs.
That particular argument isn&#8217;t played out at all, making fun of miracle stories in the Bible. No one&#8217;s ever tried that before.
John Oliver is clearly not the brightest bulb in the basket. And  somehow he parlayed his shtick into an American citizenship without having to pay President Trump $5 million.
But he’s still a moron.

Watch What Happens Live With Andy Cohen – Season 22

John Oliver, Moron

Ben Shapiro

Gender

John Oliver

Opinion

Transgender

Transgender Athletes

On his show this week, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/john-oliver">John Oliver</a> decided to spend 45 minutes defending the idea that men — or “trans women,” as he calls them — should play in women&#8217;s sports. The trans issue has destroyed the Democratic Party and utterly demolished the Left’s cultural and political credibility. But they can’t let it go. Transgenderism is a religious conviction. They must remain committed to it. Which is disturbing and bizarre and uncomfortable to witness — and extremely fortunate for Republicans. It&#8217;s also, let’s be honest, really funny. In fact, John Oliver’s commitment to the transgenderism bit is, by far and away, his funniest routine. It is in fact his only funny routine. It&#8217;s the one time when he lives up to his billing as a comedian, if unintentionally.
So today we’re going to pick through Oliver’s arguments for “trans inclusion” in women&#8217;s sports. We’ll go through it piece by piece. And in the process we’ll see how utterly vapid and hollow and deceitful John Oliver’s whole schtick is. And how morally and intellectually bankrupt gender ideology is. As one of the most morally and intellectually bankrupt people in all of media, it’s no wonder that Oliver is so attracted to it.
As we’ll see, Oliver trots out all of the standard tropes in his desperate attempt to make gender ideology seem like it isn’t insane. He blabbers for 45 minutes, hitting each talking point one by one, punctuated every five or six minutes with something that, I can only guess, is supposed to approximate a joke. But in this whole long diatribe he never once addresses the core, fundamental argument of the other side. He never once acknowledges, much less makes any attempt to respond to, our actual point. Instead we get all of the tropes. Starting with <a href="https://youtu.be/flSS1tjoxf0?feature=shared&amp;t=59">this one</a>:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Trans Athletes: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/flSS1tjoxf0?start=60&#038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
&nbsp;
So he starts with the old “why are you so obsessed with this” routine, as expected. He then says that this “obsession” by Republicans is the reason why 6 in 10 adults don’t want men in women’s sports. The actual number is more like 8 in 10. But either way, he says that Republicans have waged a relentless propaganda campaign against trans people and that is why so many Americans now agree with them. Oliver has this, of course, completely backwards.
John, let me ask you this. What did the polls on trans athletes say 20 years ago? What about 30 years ago? If the poll numbers today are the result of a recent propaganda push by Republicans, that should be born out by comparing the poll results on the question today to the poll results 30 years ago, right? So what were the polls saying on this question 30 years ago? What do you think, John? Have you checked?
Well, don’t bother. I’ll help you. There were no polls on this question 20 years ago or 30 years ago or 40 years ago. Organized sports have existed in this country for like 170 years. And yet you’ll find no polls on the topic of “transwomen” in women&#8217;s sports, you’ll find no discussion about the subject at all, until very, very recently. Women’s sports in particular have existed in some form or another since the late 1800s. And yet, again, there was no discussion about whether men who think they&#8217;re women should be included in women&#8217;s sports.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/mws-ep-1571-member-exclusive?row=2&amp;elementPosition=0&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel&amp;rowHeadline=Latest+Episodes" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show</a></h3>
If someone had conducted a poll in, say, 1950, and asked whether men who identify as women should be able to compete in women&#8217;s sports, what do you think the result would have been, John? Do you think you would have found at least 60% who responded in the negative? You’d find a lot more than 60%, wouldn&#8217;t you? It would be more like 100%, wouldn’t it? And that&#8217;s in spite of the fact that in the 1950s there was precisely no one pushing what you would call anti-trans propaganda. Republicans weren’t talking about the issue at all. And yet everyone agreed — everyone, literally everyone on Earth agreed — that if a thing is called “women’s,” it should only be for biological women.
So what does all of this tell us? Well, it tells us first of all that Republicans and conservatives aren’t the ones who started this conversation. We were all living our lives contently, without having any discussion about transgenderism, or whether men should be in women&#8217;s sports or bathrooms. Nobody was talking about it. Nobody was obsessing over it. Until the trans activists, to include yourself, came along and started screaming in our faces about it. You guys brought up this subject. You guys started marching and waving your flags and injecting your propaganda into schools and TV shows and films and everywhere else. Your side started giving castration drugs to children. Your side started listing your pronouns. None of this existed, this entire subject didn&#8217;t exist, until you guys brought it up and started obsessing over it.
Those polls you mentioned are not a result of our propaganda but of yours. The fact that there are 40% of Americans according to the poll you mentioned — or 20%, if you&#8217;re using an accurate poll — who actually think men should compete in women&#8217;s sports is a result of the relentless propaganda from your side. Again: if we’d asked this question 50 years ago, there would have been 100% of people on our side. But the question wasn&#8217;t asked. It wasn&#8217;t asked because when 100% of people are on one side, it’s not the kind of thing you even think to poll in the first place.
Moving on, Oliver next does the thing he always does, where he finds the weakest and most easily mocked version of the counter argument, and then frames the entire rest of his rant around that <a href="https://youtu.be/flSS1tjoxf0?feature=shared&amp;t=348">one example</a>. Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Trans Athletes: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/flSS1tjoxf0?start=345&#038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Now, if you wanted to find an example of someone making the case against men in women&#8217;s sports, you have literally thousands of options to choose from. Thousands and thousands of people have made this case on camera. Female athletes, biologists, doctors, highly credentialed scientific experts in any number of related fields. But John sifted through all of that and went with Lance Armstrong, because Lance Armstrong is infamous for cheating in a sport. I’d say about 99.9999% of all the people who have made the case against men in women’s sports are not themselves famous for cheating in a sport, but Oliver went searching for the .0001% who had. And he uses the silly hypothetical offered by Armstrong — Rafael Nadal suddenly transitioning to a woman — as the framing mechanism for the rest of his argument. So Oliver has chosen the absolute weakest version of the opposing argument, offered by the weakest possible spokesman, and that will be the only argument he responds to the whole rest of the way.
Of course, even the weakest version of our argument, offered by the weakest spokesman, is still totally devastating to John’s side. Our weakest argument is made of steel compared to the flimsy, fantasyland nonsense that you hear from the pro-trans side. Armstrong is, in fact, correct. If all it takes for a man to be a woman is to identify as one, then if Nadal identified as one, he would now be a woman, and there&#8217;s nothing stopping him from dominating women’s tennis like Shaquille O’Neal in his prime playing basketball against a bunch of nine-year-olds. The point isn’t that Nadal is actually likely to make this transition. It&#8217;s that the policy that John Oliver advocates for, and the position he takes, would make that sort of absurdity possible. 
But Oliver is determined to miss the point, which he continues to do here:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Trans Athletes: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/flSS1tjoxf0?start=432&#038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
&nbsp;
Oh, they don’t? Well first of all, John, how do you know that? There are many examples of mediocre male athletes who, after a while of not succeeding against the men, suddenly discover their latent female identity. Lia Thomas is just one of many examples. How do you know that the fact that he could go from the middle of the pack to first by a mile isn’t what motivated him to make the switch? That trans “sports scientist” says that the social cost of transitioning is too high. He says that he personally lost his marriage and family when he transitioned. In other words, he willingly blew up his marriage and family for the sake of living out his fantasy of womanhood. What does that tell us? It tells us that he is extremely selfish. So the argument seems to be that trans identified people would never transition just to succeed in sports — because they&#8217;re too selfish for that. But I’m not sure that logic tracks.
And at any rate, none of this matters. None of this is even remotely related to the actual point. The reason for their &#8220;transition&#8221; is totally irrelevant. It does not matter. It makes no difference. Nothing that John has said to this point — nothing — even comes close to actually addressing our argument. And that trend will continue here:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Trans Athletes: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/flSS1tjoxf0?start=509&#038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
&nbsp;
&#8220;It’s not the case that any man is stronger and more athletic than every woman,&#8221; says John Oliver. And in saying this, he has expertly knocked down and dismantled an argument that literally no one on Earth, at any point, anywhere, has made. Nobody claims that every man is stronger than every woman. John Oliver himself is proof of that. He would likely lose an arm wrestling match against my 11-year-old daughter. It’s true that scrawny, pathetically weak men do exist in this world. We’re looking at one of them.
But that’s not the point. The point about athletic advantages is that ON AVERAGE men are significantly — not slightly — significantly stronger and faster. This is because men and women are built differently. Women on average have 20% less muscle mass in their legs, smaller fast-twitch muscle fibers, smaller lungs, smaller hearts, shorter legs, much more estrogen and much less testosterone, and a lesser capacity to produce oxygen when they exert themselves. That’s why a team of high school boys could beat the women’s national team in soccer. It’s why the top ten male finishers in nearly every Olympic event always beat the top ten female finishers in the same event. In fact, the top 25 or 50 or 100 male finishers will beat the top 10 females.
It’s why you can find hundreds of examples just like this one. Andraya Yearwood and Terry Miller, both males, finished first and second in the 55-meter dash at the women’s state indoor track and field championships in Connecticut a few years ago. Miller also finished first in the 300-meter. Miller won the gold with a time of 38.9 seconds. Second place was a full second behind him – a near eternity in track time. But if Miller had raced against the boys in the same event, he <a href="https://twitter.com/MattWalshBlog/status/1101274590586851330">would have been</a> two seconds behind the guy who finished in 25th place. 
To reiterate: his “winning” time against the girls would have put him far outside the top 25 in the men’s field. The worst guy on the men’s track team can instantly become the best on the girl’s team. That’s the point. Or at least it&#8217;s the point about the athletic advantages. But even that point is not THE point. John Oliver still hasn’t addressed the actual point.
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Trans Athletes: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/flSS1tjoxf0?start=682&#038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
&nbsp;
Now, John goes on for a while about the dearth of studies dealing with “trans women” in female sports. He’s perplexed that there haven&#8217;t been more studies on the subject. But of course trans women are men, and there is ample scientific evidence and many, many studies demonstrating the physiological differences and athletic advantages enjoyed by men. He wants a study that specifically studies trans women, as if the fact that a man sees himself as a woman will in and of itself fundamentally impact his biology. But that is not the case. Which is why no one has bothered to study it. No credible scientist would ever say, “Hey, we know that men are faster and stronger than women. But what about men who think they&#8217;re women. Are they also faster and stronger?”
Their perception of themselves as women does not alter their biology. We don’t need a study to show us that, John. We just need to be not insane.
So what John is really talking about here are men who have undergone a “medical transition.” We’re being told that after “transition,” the physical advantages are diminished, supposedly. Does this mean that John Oliver is saying that only male athletes who’ve taken the drugs should be allowed to compete against women? No, he’s not saying that. At least he doesn&#8217;t appear to be saying that. His only real argument in favor of men in women&#8217;s sports is that, supposedly, men who&#8217;ve taken the transition drugs become weaker and slower. But he actually doesn&#8217;t follow that argument through to its conclusion and say that only men who’ve transitioned should compete. So again this whole thing is a red herring.
Also, why are men weaker and slower after transitioning? Why do they have less muscle mass? Well because the drugs are destroying their bodies. John Oliver is, here, proudly demonstrating that medical transition destroys the human body. It has a destructive effect on the physiology of the men who undergo these “treatments.” John seems to have little curiosity about that fact. He doesn’t linger on it or think about it very hard. Instead he just declares, “Look at that! Their bodies have been destroyed! Now they&#8217;re just like women!”
He doesn’t see any problem with equating a destroyed male body to a female body. He doesn’t see any problem with giving people supposed medical treatments that are designed to physically harm them. And he doesn’t even really think these treatments are relevant to the question of whether or not a trans woman is actually a woman or not.
That brings us to the argument that John has spent this whole diatribe studiously ignoring. The reason why our side actually opposes men in women’s sports is, as I explained during that hearing in California last week, very simply because men are not women. No matter how great or small their advantage. No matter if they’ve “transitioned” or not. No matter how they self-identify. Men are not women. The fundamental claim of the trans woman — that he is a woman — is false. It is objectively, scientifically, logically, empirically, in every way, and from every angle, false.
If there was a 30-year-old adult who wanted to play in a t-ball league against six-year-olds, we would all — even John Oliver — tell him no. But what if this 30-year-old was really un-athletic? Would that change our mind? What if he was very short, as short as a child? What if this 30-year-old would be only the tenth best t-ball player on the t-ball team? Would we let him play against the six-year-olds? No. Why? Because he&#8217;s not six-years-old.
Now what if the 30-year-old thought he was six.? What if he identified as six? What if he spent his whole life and had built his entire personality around the fantasy that he is six? Would we let him play in the six-year-old league in that case? No. In fact, we’d be even LESS accepting of him on the six-year-old team. Because not only is he still not actually six-years-old — he’s also deranged. The fact that he is deranged doesn’t make him six, and it doesn&#8217;t make us any more eager to let him play with six-year-olds. It has the exact opposite effect.
The same logic applies to women’s sports. Men are not women. Men who think they are women are still not women, and are, if anything, even less fit to be competing against them. This is the argument John Oliver won&#8217;t address. He will talk and talk and talk about the issue, but he won’t go anywhere near the actual point. The point that so-called trans women are not actually women. That’s our whole argument, John. I dare you to spend even five minutes addressing it. You’ve spent plenty of time on this topic. I think it&#8217;s time you actually get to the point.

Comic Relief Stand-Up for LA:  A Benefit For LA Wildfire Recovery

Debunking John Oliver’s Insane Defense Of Men In Women’s Sports

gender ideology

Matt Walsh

Women's sports

The ongoing drama between political commentator Meghan McCain and “The White Lotus” actress Carrie Coon is still going strong, which is enough to make McCain question why the actress on one of the most popular shows on TV right now is so fixated on her and other conservatives actually watching it.
“I don’t understand why Carrie Coon’s been talking about me as much as she has,” McCain told The Daily Wire. “It just feels so random, like given that she’s on the biggest show on TV.”
It all started with a back and forth on social media. Coon, who plays an affluent liberal hotel guest on the hit HBO series, responded to one of McCain&#8217;s posts on X about President Donald Trump voicing support for cancer treatment during his address to Congress, which McCain <a href="https://x.com/MeghanMcCain/status/1897127251445154235">described</a> as “so beautiful.” 
Coon responded by commenting, “Who’s gonna tell her?” McCain shot back with a still from the HBO series of Kate, who plays Coon&#8217;s conservative friend, making an annoyed and disgusted face. A few days later, McCain <a href="https://x.com/MeghanMcCain/status/1898824564567597307">told</a> X followers that she couldn’t “decide if I should still watch White Lotus tonight since one of the stars decided to tweet some nasty crap at me.”
Podcast host Megyn Kelly chimed in, <a href="https://x.com/megynkelly/status/1898835232075505669">saying</a>, “Watch it anyway. Virtually every star in every movie and TV show hates conservatives, who could watch nothing if the prerequisite were: the ppl on screen could possibly like me or be like me.”
But Coon didn’t stop at the snarky tweet. While speaking to <a href="https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-features/white-lotus-finale-mike-white-interview-1236177751/">The Hollywood Reporter</a> on April 2, she said, “I do think people like Meghan McCain and her community are really gratified to see a conservative person on television,” referencing Bibb’s character, who called herself an “independent” and strongly insinuated she voted for Trump.
McCain expressed her surprise at being name-dropped in the magazine interview. “I’ve never met this woman. I do not know this person,” she emphasized. “If I were on the number one HBO show that everyone on planet earth was talking about, I tell you one thing: I would not be feuding with me on Twitter.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
<a href="https://t.co/NjYQgUHcYZ">https://t.co/NjYQgUHcYZ</a> <a href="https://t.co/112hrR3Gxc">pic.twitter.com/112hrR3Gxc</a>
&mdash; Meghan McCain (@MeghanMcCain) <a href="https://twitter.com/MeghanMcCain/status/1898065159806996655?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 7, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
McCain told The Daily Wire that she thinks it&#8217;s &#8220;triggering&#8221; for Coon that conservative women exist.
“It’s so triggering for people like her that Republican women exist, that we just live in the world and breathe and watch her content,” McCain said. 
She also pointed out the hypocrisy of actors criticizing audiences with opposing views while still expecting their support. “I just don’t understand this,” she said, adding that the whole thing was “weird and unfortunate.”
She added that while she doesn’t necessarily feel “represented” by the closeted conservative character of Kate, she does respect her the most out of the trio of friends on “The White Lotus.”
“I do think it’s interesting that she’s not the dark villain of the show,” she added, praising creator Mike White for giving all the characters nuance and depth. “She’s like a normal friend. She was the one that was drinking water and had her pajamas on … the one who’s going to church every week.”
It&#8217;s also possible that the narrative changes. &#8220;The White Lotus&#8221; season 3 finale, titled &#8220;Amor Fati,&#8221; is this Sunday, and as anyone who&#8217;s watched the first two seasons knows, anything can happen. So maybe the seemingly normal friend will end up being the murderer?

Meghan McCain Carrie Coon

Meghan McCain: Why Is White Lotus Actress Carrie Coon So Obsessed with Me?

Meghan McCain

Late-Night TV may never be the same.
HBO’s John Oliver, host of “Last Week Tonight,” is facing a <a href="https://nypost.com/2025/04/01/media/healthcare-exec-sues-john-oliver-for-defamation-over-toilet-hygiene-rant/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">new defamation lawsuit</a> from health care executive Dr. Brian Morley who claims the comedian slurred him “for ratings and profits.” 
In an April 2024 telecast, Oliver played an alleged audio clip of Morley at an administrative hearing <a href="https://ew.com/john-oliver-sued-by-healthcare-official-he-called-out-on-last-week-tonight-11708201" target="_blank" rel="noopener">saying</a>, “People have bowel movements every day where they don’t completely clean themselves and we don’t fuss over [them] too much. People are allowed to be dirty … You know, I would allow him to be a little dirty for a couple of days.”
Oliver’s immediate on-air response: “F*** that doctor with a rusty canoe! I hope he gets tetanus of the balls.”
Morley’s lawyer claims the recording was altered by the program.
Suing comedians for telling the wrong jokes seems an uphill legal battle at best. The First Amendment allows for plenty of creative embellishments, although Oliver’s comments proved highly specific and potentially damaging to the doctor’s reputation.
The courts will have the final say on the matter.
Should Dr. Morley emerge victorious it could have a much larger impact. Yes, “Last Week Tonight” would take a sizable hit, but consider the big picture.
What if other satirical comics have to watch what they say moving forward? Will they require fact-checkers on set? Should Stephen Colbert run his anti-Republican rants by CBS Legal before hitting the stage each night?
Comedians have considerable leeway when it comes to political satire as opposed to everyday citizens. Those wide guardrails matter, allowing for satirists to skewer elected officials without fear of political ramifications.
How far is too far, though? Thanks to the sorry state of modern late night TV, the question matters more than ever.
<div id="attachment_903043" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-903043" class="size-large wp-image-903043" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/GettyImages-2176959872-864x576.jpg" alt="NEW YORK CITY - OCTOBER 8: The Late Show with Stephen Colbert and guest Vice President Kamala Harris during Tuesday's October 8, 2024 show. (Photo by Scott Kowalchyk/CBS via Getty Images)" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/GettyImages-2176959872-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/GettyImages-2176959872-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/GettyImages-2176959872-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/GettyImages-2176959872.jpg 1024w" sizes=" (max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />Scott Kowalchyk/CBS via Getty Images</div>
The hosts in question, however, bend the truth so regularly it’s often unrecognizable. It’s not a bug but a feature. Yes, Legacy Media outlets warp reality in damning ways, too. The list of Fake News narratives continues to grow in the Age of Trump.
Colbert and co. often walk in lockstep with their journalist pals.
Look no further than the Russian Collusion Hoax™. Yes, the media fed that narrative beast for far too long, but late-night hosts parroted even the most extreme collusion talking points while assuming they had the goods on President Donald Trump.
They didn’t.
CBS’s Colbert hit the lowest low when he called President Donald Trump Vladimir Putin’s <a href="https://www.aclu.org/news/free-speech/you-cant-say-television-colbert-edition" target="_blank" rel="noopener">BLEEP holster.</a> in one incendiary monologue. He also played up the Fake News story known to many as the Trump “pee-pee tape.”
The litigious world leader could have had something to say about that.
Colbert and fellow far-Left host Jimmy Kimmel also defended President Joe Biden from accusations, later confirmed, that he was suffering from dementia-like conditions during the 2024 presidential campaign. Both comedians had seen Biden up close during separate fundraising events.
They must have witnessed his diminished state firsthand. They didn’t share what they saw with their audiences, and Kimmel took that a step further. He used his “Jimmy Kimmel Live” bully pulpit to call anyone who said Biden froze up during his <a href="https://www.tvinsider.com/1140442/joe-biden-freezing-video-fundraiser-jimmy-kimmel/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">fundraising effort a liar</a>.
The projection was strong that night.
Other hosts have taken the media’s warped baton and run with it. Take the host of NBC’s “Late Night with Seth Meyers.” The “Saturday Night Live” alum skewered President Trump in 2017 for <a href="https://time.com/4705083/seth-meyers-trump-meals-on-wheels-budget-cuts/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">gutting</a> the “Meals on Wheels” program.
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/fake-news-did-trump-just-kill-meals-wheels-not-ben-shapiro" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Except Trump didn’t.</a>
Meyers also played down the rampant violence spreading in Portland in 2020, as did some press outlets, in ways that felt like propaganda, not satire. And he wasn’t alone.
<div id="attachment_903053" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-903053" class="size-large wp-image-903053" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/GettyImages-1248172738-864x576.jpg" alt="LATE NIGHT WITH SETH MEYERS -- Episode 1405 -- Pictured: (l-r) Comedian John Oliver during an interview with host Seth Meyers on March 13, 2023 -- (Photo by: Lloyd Bishop/NBC via Getty Images)" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/GettyImages-1248172738-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/GettyImages-1248172738-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/GettyImages-1248172738-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/GettyImages-1248172738.jpg 1024w" sizes=" (max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />Lloyd Bishop/NBC via Getty Images</div>
Oliver also downplayed the ongoing violence swirling around parts of Portland, <a href="https://www.hollywoodintoto.com/john-oliver-media-portland-violence/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">serving up this epic distortion</a>.
“Protests had been mostly peaceful there… it’s about one block that was actually starting to see fewer confrontations between protesters and police before federal agents moved in.”
Fake News? It’s beyond debate. But is it worth suing over? That’s where the conversation gets sticky.
What about late-night alum Amber Ruffin? She briefly hosted an ill-fated talk show on Peacock and has written for “Late Night with Seth Meyers.” Ruffin recently cited the serially debunked <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/amber-ruffin-dropped-white-house-correspondents-dinner-response_n_67eb51c2e4b0ff137ab490b4" target="_blank" rel="noopener">“Very Fine People” hoax</a> anew during a late-night chat to smite President Trump.
Said hoax claims Trump praised Neo Nazis following a 2017 Charlottesville rally which left one woman dead. The lie proved so brazen even Snopes called it out (albeit several years after the lie gained cultural ground).
It’s not just late-night comedy, of course. Comedians use their considerable platforms to spread lies that could be seen as libelous.
Take <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/bill-burr-goes-full-ahole?row=0&amp;elementPosition=undefined&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;author=Ben+Shapiro&amp;title=Bill+Burr+Goes+Full+A**hole&amp;category=News" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Bill Burr</a>, who insinuated Kyle Rittenhouse was a White Supremacist during his Netflix special “Bill Burr Presents: Friends Who Kill.”
<div id="attachment_903055" style="width: 730px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-903055" class="size-large wp-image-903055" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/GettyImages-1428254659-720x576.jpg" alt="BURBANK, CALIFORNIA - SEPTEMBER 27: Comedian Bill Burr performs at the Bob Golub Stand-up For Deaf, Hard Of Hearing Fundraiser at Flappers Comedy Club and Restaurant Burbank on September 27, 2022 in Burbank, California. (Photo by Michael S. Schwartz/Getty Images)" width="720" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/GettyImages-1428254659-720x576.jpg 720w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/GettyImages-1428254659-300x240.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/GettyImages-1428254659-768x614.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/04/GettyImages-1428254659.jpg 1024w" sizes=" (max-width: 720px) 100vw, 720px" />Michael S. Schwartz/Getty Images</div>
Rittenhouse shot three people, killing two and injuring one during a 2020 fracas tied to the BLM protests. A court of law found him innocent, agreeing with his self-defense explanation. Elements of the press and the Left insisted his actions were racist, even though his victims were white and they couldn’t pin any racially-charged comments to the young man.
Burr picked up that false narrative, saying Rittenhouse was a <a href="https://www.hollywoodintoto.com/bill-burr-kyle-rittenhouse-white-supremacist/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">White Supremacist.</a>
“You gotta drop me off like two blocks away so my other racist friends don’t see my mommy drove me,” he cracked in the special, channeling Rittenhouse.
Comedians have more leeway when it comes to politicians, but no one elected Rittenhouse to elected office.
There’s a better solution here, one that doesn’t require legal challenges for First Amendment squabbles. A healthy, robust press would let viewers know that much of what’s said on late-night TV just isn’t true.
Journalists routinely regurgitate late-night jokes. They do the same with “Saturday Night Live” skits. That’s all well and good, but that practice is hollow if it doesn’t include fact checking when appropriate.
If comedians knew they’ve be held accountable for twisting the truth into so many pretzels, they might crack smarter gags that actually speak truth to power.
* * *
Christian Toto is an award-winning journalist, movie critic and editor of <a href="https://www.hollywoodintoto.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">HollywoodInToto.com</a>. He previously served as associate editor with Breitbart News’ Big Hollywood. Follow him at <a href="https://www.hollywoodintoto.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">HollywoodInToto.com</a>.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Menu

HBO