Director James Cameron says he’s firmly against using AI-generated actors, calling the results “horrifying.” In a recent interview with CBS Sunday Morning, the filmmaker addressed speculation that he might turn to AI for future installments of the popular “Avatar” franchise and made clear he has no interest in doing so. “For years, there was this sense that, ‘Oh, they’re doing something strange with computers and they’re replacing actors,’ when in fact, once you really drill down and you see what we’re doing, it’s a celebration of the actor-director moment,” Cameron said. “Now, go to the other end of the spectrum, and you’ve got generative AI, where they can make up a character,” he went on. “They can make up an actor. They can make up a performance from scratch with a text prompt. It’s like, no. That’s horrifying to me. That’s the opposite. That’s exactly what we’re not doing.” When asked why he’s against AI-generated actors like Tilly Norwood, the “Titanic” director replied, “I don’t want a computer doing what I pride myself on being able to do with actors. I don’t want to replace actors, I love working with actors.” Cameron said he was excited about how emerging technology could help the fledgling genres of sci-fi and fantasy films, which are costly to make, without entirely replacing live actors. He also mentioned some of the pitfalls of AI. “What generative AI can’t do is create something new that’s never been seen. If you think about it, the models… it’s a magic trick, what they can do is quite astonishing. But the models are trained on everything that’s ever been done before that; it can’t be trained on that which has never been done,” Cameron said.  “So you will innately see, essentially, all of human art and human experience put into a blender, and you’ll get something that is kind of an average of that. So what you can’t have is that individual screenwriter’s unique lived experience and their quirks. You won’t find the idiosyncrasies of a particular actor.” The director predicted that live performances will become more “sacred” in the future. 

President Donald Trump laid into a radical left congressional candidate from Tennessee on Sunday, blasting Democrat Aftyn Behn as “a woman who hates Christianity, will take away your guns, wants Open Borders, Transgender for everybody, men in women’s sports, and openly disdains Country music.” Trump delivered the verbal smackdown in a Truth Social post — in which he also threw his full support behind her opponent, Republican Matt Van Epps — over a viral audio clip in which she’d declared her hatred for Nashville, bachelorettes, and even country music. His post comes just ahead of the special election in Tennessee’s 7th Congressional District on Tuesday. “I am asking all America First Patriots in Tennessee’s 7th Congressional District, who haven’t voted yet, to please GET OUT AND VOTE on Election Day, Tuesday, December 2nd, for a phenomenal Candidate, Matt Van Epps,” Trump’s post began. “Matt is fighting against a woman who hates Christianity, will take away your guns, wants Open Borders, Transgender for everybody, men in women’s sports, and openly disdains Country music. She said all of these things precisely, and without question — IT’S ON TAPE!” Trump warned voters that they needed to get to the polls, adding, “Do not take this Race for granted. The Radical Left Democrats are spending a fortune to beat one of the best Candidates we’ve ever had, Matt Van Epps! You can win this Election for Matt. GET OUT AND VOTE FOR MATT VAN EPPS, who has my Complete and Total Endorsement — HE WILL NEVER LET YOU DOWN!” Behn raised eyebrows with her anti-Nashville rant: “‘I hate the city, I hate the Tennessee bachelorettes, I hate pedal taverns, I hate country music, I hate all the things that make Nashville … I hate it.” She tried to do a little damage control after the audio clip went viral, claiming on the “Breaking Points” podcast that she could not possibly hate country music. “So, I’m going to say something I haven’t said,” Behn told the hosts. “And I think it’s funny, I hope my parents don’t kill me, but I do not hate country music. I was conceived after a George Strait concert, so … I feel personally attacked.” Behn also made headlines with another audio clip of herself describing a recurring dream in which she stood up in a crowded cafeteria full of women and shouted, “I don’t want children, I want power!”

The Trump administration tightens immigration restrictions following a fatal attack on National Guardsmen, illegal alien access to federal benefits comes under scrutiny, and is the United States about to strike narco-terrorists on Venezuelan soil? It’s Monday, December 1, 2025, and this is the news you need to know to start your day. Today’s edition of the Morning Wire podcast can be heard below, and the video version can be seen on The Daily Wire: Trump Launches Immigration Crackdown After D.C. Shootings Topline: The tragic shooting of two National Guard members from West Virginia by an Afghan national has triggered a massive immigration response from the Trump administration. And the president does not appear to be done with his sweeping actions. Over the course of last week and then into the weekend, President Donald Trump has taken a series of aggressive actions in response to this attack, about which some very harrowing details continue to emerge. The attack: Police say the 29-year-old suspect approached with a revolver and was shooting at a point-blank distance. He was also reportedly shouting “Allah Akbar!” One heroic guardsman, armed with only a pocketknife, was able to stop the shooter. The guardsman heard the gunfire, charged the shooter, and then stabbed him with the knife. Sarah Beckstrom, a 20-year-old woman who was one of the guardsmen shot in the attack, died as a result of her injuries. The other guardsman who was shot, Andrew Wolf, is still fighting for his life. There continues to be an outpouring of support and prayers for his recovery and his family. The suspect was also severely wounded, but he is expected to survive. Where the prosecution stands: U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro said that the charges have been upgraded to first-degree murder since Beckstrom’s death. Pirro said that this appears to be a case of an ambush-style attack. The FBI is even looking at this as a possible act of terrorism. In response, President Trump said he is considering dispatching 500 more troops to the nation’s capital to keep the peace, doubling down on his earlier executive order to protect the city and quell crime. The suspect: He came into the United States as part of Operation Allies Welcome, launched by the Biden administration after the botched 2021 Afghanistan withdrawal. Many soldiers, including Afghan and American soldiers, were killed during that process, and the Taliban was able to retake the country. The suspect fought with a group of elite Afghan fighters known as “Zero Units.” They were all so-called “death squads” working with the CIA to help fight the Taliban. A friend of the suspect’s told the New York Post that he suffered from serious mental health issues as a result of his years in combat. Immigration crackdown: Trump has said the United States is not admitting any more Afghan nationals. The president has ordered a review of how Afghans were vetted during and after the withdrawal from Afghanistan. Notably, tens of thousands of Afghan nationals came to the United States as refugees following the withdrawal. The State Department has said it is refusing visas to Afghan nationals until it conducts further vetting of the country. The president has said that he will “deport any Foreign National who is a public charge, security risk, or non-compatible with Western Civilization.” Trump Steps Up Enforcement Against Illegals Receiving Benefits Topline: The Trump administration is working to remove federal benefits for people who are in the country illegally. Trump said in a post on Truth Social that he will “end all Federal benefits and subsidies to noncitizens.” He added that many recent arrivals depend on taxpayer-supported welfare programs while coming from “failed nations, or from prisons, mental institutions, gangs, or drug cartels.” Bessent’s turn: Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has moved to implement the president’s order. Bessent said that his department is working to cut off federal benefits to illegals and stressed that these must be preserved for American citizens. Specifically, Bessent said the Treasury “will issue proposed regulations clarifying that the refunded portions of certain individual income tax benefits are no longer available to illegal and other non-qualified aliens.” The Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network also issued an alert to better crack down on the exploitation of the U.S. financial system by illegals who are seeking to move illegally obtained funds.  The department said that over the past several years, the United States has witnessed a “significant volume of cross-border funds transfers, including remittances” from illegals. MN Somalis: City Journal has reported in detail on a massive fraud scheme in Minnesota under the tenure of Democrat Gov. Tim Walz, where billions of taxpayer dollars intended for social services were funneled through fake nonprofits and shell companies, and — alarmingly — some of that money ended up in the hands of the al-Qaeda-linked terrorist group Al-Shabaab. Much of the fraud has been traced back to Minnesota’s Somali community, where fraudsters have allegedly exploited numerous loopholes in the state’s welfare system. But the story has been overlooked for a long time. “I think it’s fair to say there was an unwillingness or inability from Democratic state officials in Minnesota to recognize some pretty obvious alarm bells here. Claims were skyrocketing, spiraling out of control,” said investigative reporter Ryan Thorpe, who helped break the story. “The reality is, the Somali community … is a voting bloc you have to win if you’re going to win political office in Minneapolis.” Trump Clears The Skies Over Venezuela Topline: Tensions in the Caribbean are escalating after President Trump announced that the airspace over Venezuela should be considered closed. The announcement has raised new questions over potential U.S. strikes inside Venezuela amid the president’s war on drug cartels. The situation around Venezuela appears precarious. Trump on Saturday posted on Truth Social: “To all Airlines, Pilots, Drug Dealers, and Human Traffickers, please consider THE AIRSPACE ABOVE AND SURROUNDING VENEZUELA TO BE CLOSED IN ITS ENTIRETY.” That post has again sparked predictions about when airstrikes could occur. “We should read into it that strikes are very probably going to occur over the course of this week,” retired Admiral James Stavridis told CNN. “When you hear the president of the United States throw that warning out there, to me it sounds like strikes are coming probably sooner rather than later.” The fallout: Venezuela’s foreign minister called Trump’s post an “extravagant, illegal, and unjustified aggression against the people of Venezuela.” A country can’t actually close another country’s airspace, but that seems to be a technicality in this situation. Ten days ago, the FAA had already warned about a “potentially hazardous situation” for flights over Venezuela. Commercial air traffic has avoided the area since. Venezuela has said that U.S. migrant repatriation flights have stopped. Diplomacy? The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump and Nicolás Maduro, the Venezuelan leader, spoke by phone recently. Trump confirmed the call on Sunday while speaking to reporters on board Air Force One. Trump did not provide details, but the call represents a shift after the U.S. cut off diplomatic talks in October. Reportedly, Secretary of State Marco Rubio was on the call, as well, and Trump and Maduro spoke of the possibility of a meeting, which would be a significant shift after Trump called on Maduro to step down and authorized CIA operations in Venezuela. Allies of the president have maintained that this is a drug operation–a very intense one, but one that will not lead to war.

The Afghan national suspected of killing one National Guardsman and wounding another in Washington, D.C., last week was “radicalized” after coming into the United States, according to Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. Noem told NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday that the federal government believes 29-year-old Rahmanullah Lakanwal maintained “connections” to people in Afghanistan who may have helped radicalize him. Lakanwal was allowed to enter the United States under the Biden administration’s Operation Allies Welcome following the former president’s disastrous withdrawal of U.S. troops from the country. “I will say we believe he was radicalized since he’s been here in this country,” Noem said. “We do believe it was through connections in his home community and state, and we’re going to continue to talk to those who interacted with him, who were his family members, who talk to them.” Lakanwal is accused of shooting National Guardsmen Sarah Beckstrom and Andrew Wolfe on the day before Thanksgiving, killing Beckstrom and seriously wounding Wolfe. The suspected shooter was injured by return fire, but he is expected to survive and stand trial. Lakanwal was charged with first-degree murder, with more charges expected to be handed down as the investigation continues. President Donald Trump called the shooting a “terrorist attack,” saying that the suspect “went nuts.” “It happens too often with these people,” Trump added. The suspected shooter was granted asylum in the United States after serving alongside U.S. troops in a special Afghan Army unit that was backed by the CIA, the Associated Press reported. Noem blamed the Biden administration for failing to properly vet Afghan refugees who were granted asylum in the United States. Lakanwal’s asylum claim was approved in April under the Trump administration, but Noem said “the vetting process all happened under Joe Biden’s administration.” “Vetting is happening when they come into the country, and that was completely abandoned under Joe Biden’s administration,” Noem added. Lakanwal reportedly exhibited troubling behavior long before he attacked National Guard troops in D.C., according to the Associated Press. Lakanwal settled with his wife and children in Bellingham, Washington, where he reportedly struggled to hold a job and failed to assimilate into U.S. culture, according to emails from a community advocate who works with Afghan refugees. In one email from January 2024, the community advocate wrote that Lakanwal “has not been functional as a person, father and provider since March of last year, 03/2023. He quit his job that month, and his behavior has changed greatly.” The community advocate added that Lakanwal would spend weeks in a “darkened room, not speaking to anyone, not even his wife or older kids.” After receiving the emails from the community advocate, the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants checked up on Lakanwal, but it appears that Lakanwal was not contacted or refused assistance. Lakanwal drove across the United States from Bellingham to Washington, D.C., where he allegedly carried out the attack, according to U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro.

The Washington Post ran with an anonymously-sourced hit piece claiming that War Secretary Pete Hegseth had ordered Seal Team 6, when executing a strike against narco-terrorists in the Caribbean, to “kill them all” — and legacy media outlets fell all over themselves platforming guests who would question whether or not such an order, if given, was legal. For those who don’t spend their Sunday mornings glued to the television — and their Sunday afternoons attempting to dig through a week’s worth of network and cable news media spin — The Daily Wire has compiled a short summary of what you may have missed. Once the story began circulating on Saturday, Hegseth addressed it directly, saying, “As usual, the fake news is delivering more fabricated, inflammatory, and derogatory reporting to discredit our incredible warriors fighting to protect the homeland.” “As we’ve said from the beginning, and in every statement, these highly effective strikes are specifically intended to be ‘lethal, kinetic strikes.’ The declared intent is to stop lethal drugs, destroy narco-boats, and kill the narco-terrorists who are poisoning the American people,” Hegseth continued. “Every trafficker we kill is affiliated with a Designated Terrorist Organization.” The focus across media outlets was on what happened after the initial missile strike: operators watched a live feed that showed two survivors clinging to the wreckage of the boat. Then, according to The Washington Post’s report, a second strike was carried out in order to comply with the directive to “kill them all” — and the legality of that second strike in particular was where they focused the majority of the attention. On ABC’s “This Week,” host Jonathan Karl brought in global affairs correspondent Martha Raddatz to discuss the issue, and she questioned whether the second strike, reportedly carried out when the two survivors were not known to be an “imminent threat” might stand in violation of the “rules of war.” “Did those two men clinging to the side of the boat pose an imminent threat?” she asked, and she wondered aloud whether the order to strike a second time had been given with the knowledge that survivors were hanging on for dear life, and whether the lawyers had been consulted about the legality of such a strike. “Did those two men clinging to the side of the boat pose an imminent threat?”@MarthaRaddatz weighs in on the Washington Post reporting of a military strike that allegedly targeted two survivors in the Caribbean. https://t.co/qh5zs8hdWr pic.twitter.com/alnukF1hlq — This Week (@ThisWeekABC) November 30, 2025 Karl then set up Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) with the framing of the second strike as a “war crime.” Van Hollen agreed that it would certainly be a “war crime,” but only if one accepted the Trump administration’s assertion that the United States was, in fact, at war with the cartels. “But it could be worse than that. If that theory is wrong, then it’s plain murder,” he said. “But even if you accept their legal theory, then it is a war crime.” “I do believe that the Secretary of Defense should be held accountable for giving those kind of orders.” Sen. Van Hollen comments on the Washington Post reporting of a military strike that allegedly targeted two survivors in the Caribbean. https://t.co/CeUj71b7jA pic.twitter.com/eqaL76Vd4o — This Week (@ThisWeekABC) November 30, 2025 Rep. Don Bacon (R-NE) took the same position as Raddatz, arguing that he could not see how two men hanging onto wreckage in the water amounted to an “imminent threat.” “It’s hard to believe that two people on a raft trying to survive would pose an imminent threat,” he said, but argued that he didn’t believe Hegseth would give an order to kill survivors after an initial strike. Rep. Don Bacon on the Washington Post reporting of a military strike that allegedly targeted two survivors in the Caribbean: “It’s hard to believe that two people on a raft trying to survive would pose an imminent threat.” https://t.co/Nh3a5IomlB pic.twitter.com/NmxgtniEnp — This Week (@ThisWeekABC) November 30, 2025 On CBS’s “Face the Nation,” Senator Tim Kaine (D-VA) argued that he was unsure of the legality of any of the strikes against narco-terrorists. “It’s time for Congress to rein in a president who is deciding to wage war on his own say so, which is not what the Constitution allows,” he said. He also argued that a second strike “rises to the level of a war crime if it’s true.” Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) says the “shoddy” legal rationale the Trump administration provided Congress for its military strikes on alleged drug boats “was not at all persuasive that these are legal actions.” “It’s time for Congress to rein in a president who is deciding to wage war… pic.twitter.com/KrMKfTNhYb — Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) November 30, 2025 On CNN’s “State of the Union,” Senator Mark Kelly (D-AZ) claimed that he would have disregarded the order to carry out the second strike. “I’m a guy who — I have sunk two ships … during the first Gulf War,” Kelly said. “I never in that situation questioned whether those strikes were legal. We were given an order to do this, it was a time of war.” Kelly went on to say that he, like Kaine, questioned the legality of the strikes from the start. BASH: You mentioned that you were a captain in the Navy. If you received that order, would you have carried it out? KELLY: No. No. pic.twitter.com/CngXyLvL1f — State of the Union (@CNNSOTU) November 30, 2025 A second strike on top of that — particularly when the men in the water supposedly posed no immediate threat — would rise to the level of a “war crime,” Kelly said. Sen. Mark Kelly: U.S. military carrying out second strike on a suspected drug vessel killing unarmed survivors “seems to” constitute a war crime. pic.twitter.com/eTJl19bVxm — State of the Union (@CNNSOTU) November 30, 2025 On Fox News’ “Big Weekend Show,” however, Marine Corps veteran Joey Jones pushed back and argued that an “imminent threat” does not always have to come in the form of guns pointed at American citizens. ? Joey Jones just ended the left with one quote: “Spare me the tears over terrorists when you don’t cry over Americans who’ve died from them. Spare me the tears over terrorists when you didn’t have anything to say when President Obama droned American citizens.” ??? pic.twitter.com/6ISsgZkWzD — Gina Milan (@ginamilan_) November 29, 2025 Jones noted that if the survivors were able to radio others in their drug trafficking network, that could be just as grave a threat — and could also quickly result in men with guns showing up to defend them.